↓ Skip to main content

Balanced: a randomised trial examining the efficacy of two self-monitoring methods for an app-based multi-behaviour intervention to improve physical activity, sitting and sleep in adults

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
263 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Balanced: a randomised trial examining the efficacy of two self-monitoring methods for an app-based multi-behaviour intervention to improve physical activity, sitting and sleep in adults
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3256-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mitch J. Duncan, Corneel Vandelanotte, Stewart G. Trost, Amanda L. Rebar, Naomi Rogers, Nicola W. Burton, Beatrice Murawski, Anna Rayward, Sasha Fenton, Wendy J. Brown

Abstract

Many adults are insufficiently physically active, have prolonged sedentary behaviour and report poor sleep. These behaviours can be improved by interventions that include education, goal setting, self-monitoring, and feedback strategies. Few interventions have explicitly targeted these behaviours simultaneously or examined the relative efficacy of different self-monitoring methods. This study aims to compare the efficacy of two self-monitoring methods in an app-based multi-behaviour intervention to improve objectively measured physical activity, sedentary, and sleep behaviours, in a 9 week 2-arm randomised trial. Participants will be adults (n = 64) who report being physically inactive, sitting >8 h/day and frequent insufficient sleep (≥14 days out of last 30). The "Balanced" intervention is delivered via a smartphone 'app', and includes education materials (guidelines, strategies to promote change in behaviour), goal setting, self-monitoring and feedback support. Participants will be randomly allocated to either a device-entered or user-entered self-monitoring method. The device-entered group will be provided with a activity tracker to self-monitor behaviours. The user-entered group will recall and manually record behaviours. Assessments will be conducted at 0, 3, 6, and 9 weeks. Physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep-wake behaviours will be measured using the wrist worn Geneactiv accelerometer. Linear mixed models will be used to examine differences between groups and over time using an alpha of 0.01. This study will evaluate an app-based multi-behavioural intervention to improve physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep; and the relative efficacy of two different approaches to self-monitoring these behaviours. Outcomes will provide information to inform future interventions and self-monitoring targeting these behaviours. ACTRN12615000182594 (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. Registry URL: www.anzctr.org.au ; registered prospectively on 25 February 2015).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 263 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 259 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 56 21%
Researcher 39 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 14%
Student > Bachelor 28 11%
Other 11 4%
Other 43 16%
Unknown 49 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 41 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 38 14%
Psychology 38 14%
Sports and Recreations 24 9%
Social Sciences 17 6%
Other 39 15%
Unknown 66 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 October 2017.
All research outputs
#7,109,548
of 11,888,244 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,769
of 8,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,422
of 326,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#139
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,888,244 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,123 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,882 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.