↓ Skip to main content

Physical activity promotion in the primary care setting in pre- and type 2 diabetes - the Sophia step study, an RCT

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
585 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
Physical activity promotion in the primary care setting in pre- and type 2 diabetes - the Sophia step study, an RCT
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1941-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jenny Rossen, Agneta Yngve, Maria Hagströmer, Kerstin Brismar, Barbara E. Ainsworth, Christina Iskull, Peter Möller, Unn-Britt Johansson

Abstract

Physical activity prevents or delays progression of impaired glucose tolerance in high-risk individuals. Physical activity promotion should serve as a basis in diabetes care. It is necessary to develop and evaluate health-promoting methods that are feasible as well as cost-effective within diabetes care. The aim of Sophia Step Study is to evaluate the impact of a multi-component and a single component physical activity intervention aiming at improving HbA1c (primary outcome) and other metabolic and cardiovascular risk factors, physical activity levels and overall health in patients with pre- and type 2 diabetes. Sophia Step Study is a randomized controlled trial and participants are randomly assigned to either a multi-component intervention group (A), a pedometer group (B) or a control group (C). In total, 310 patients will be included and followed for 24 months. Group A participants are offered pedometers and a website to register steps, physical activity on prescription with yearly follow-ups, motivational interviewing (10 occasions) and group consultations (including walks, 12 occasions). Group B participants are offered pedometers and a website to register steps. Group C are offered usual care. The theoretical framework underpinning the interventions is the Health Belief Model, the Stages of Change Model, and the Social Cognitive Theory. Both the multi-component intervention (group A) and the pedometer intervention (group B) are using several techniques for behavior change such as self-monitoring, goal setting, feedback and relapse prevention. Measurements are made at week 0, 8, 12, 16, month 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24, including metabolic and cardiovascular biomarkers (HbA1c as primary health outcome), accelerometry and daily steps. Furthermore, questionnaires were used to evaluate dietary intake, physical activity, perceived ability to perform physical activity, perceived support for being active, quality of life, anxiety, depression, well-being, perceived treatment, perceived stress and diabetes self- efficacy. This study will show if a multi-component intervention using pedometers with group- and individual consultations is more effective than a single- component intervention using pedometers alone, in increasing physical activity and improving HbA1c, other metabolic and cardiovascular risk factors, physical activity levels and overall health in patients with pre- and type 2 diabetes. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02374788 . Registered 28 January 2015.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 585 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 581 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 102 17%
Student > Bachelor 81 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 10%
Researcher 55 9%
Other 26 4%
Other 95 16%
Unknown 169 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 121 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 98 17%
Psychology 54 9%
Sports and Recreations 29 5%
Unspecified 24 4%
Other 71 12%
Unknown 188 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 July 2015.
All research outputs
#13,949,913
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,057
of 14,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,457
of 262,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#185
of 267 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 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 14,865 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 262,656 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 267 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.