Accelerometer-Measured Physical Activity Data Sets (Global Physical Activity Data Set Catalogue) That Include Markers of Cardiometabolic Health: Systematic Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease accounts for 17.9 million deaths globally each year. Many research study data sets have been collected to answer questions regarding the relationship between cardiometabolic health and accelerometer-measured physical activity. This scoping review aimed to map the available data sets that have collected accelerometer-measured physical activity and cardiometabolic health markers. These data were then used to inform the development of a publicly available resource, the Global Physical Activity Data set (GPAD) catalogue. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to systematically identify data sets that have measured physical activity using accelerometers and cardiometabolic health markers using either an observational or interventional study design. METHODS: Databases, trial registries, and gray literature (inception until February 2021; updated search from February 2021 to September 2022) were systematically searched to identify studies that analyzed data sets of physical activity and cardiometabolic health outcomes. To be eligible for inclusion, data sets must have measured physical activity using an accelerometric device in adults aged ≥18 years; a sample size >400 participants (unless recruited participants in a low- and middle-income country where a sample size threshold was reduced to 100); used an observational, longitudinal, or trial-based study design; and collected at least 1 cardiometabolic health marker (unless only body mass was measured). Two reviewers screened the search results to identify eligible studies, and from these, the unique names of each data set were recorded, and characteristics about each data set were extracted from several sources. RESULTS: A total of 17,391 study reports were identified, and after screening, 319 were eligible, with 122 unique data sets in these study reports meeting the review inclusion criteria. Data sets were found in 49 countries across 5 continents, with the most developed in Europe (n=53) and the least in Africa and Oceania (n=4 and n=3, respectively). The most common accelerometric brand and device wear location was Actigraph and the waist, respectively. Height and body mass were the most frequently measured cardiometabolic health markers in the data sets (119/122, 97.5% data sets), followed by blood pressure (82/122, 67.2% data sets). The number of participants in the included data sets ranged from 103,712 to 120. Once the review processes had been completed, the GPAD catalogue was developed to house all the identified data sets. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified and mapped the contents of data sets from around the world that have collected potentially harmonizable accelerometer-measured physical activity and cardiometabolic health markers. The GPAD catalogue is a web-based open-source resource developed from the results of this review, which aims to facilitate the harmonization of data sets to produce evidence that will reduce the burden of disease from physical inactivity.

Effectiveness of interventions to increase device-measured physical activity in pregnant women: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Interventions that provide pregnant women with opportunities to access and participate in physical activity have been shown to be beneficial to their health. Much of this evidence however has been based on self-reported physical activity data, which may be prone to inflated effects due to recall bias and social desirability bias. No previous synthesis of randomised controlled trials has assessed the effectiveness of these interventions using only device measured data, to assess their health benefits more accurately in pregnant women. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to address this evidence gap. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, SportDiscus, APA PsycINFO, Embase and Web of Science databases were queried from inception up to December 2, 2021. An updated search of PubMed was conducted on May 16, 2022. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that recruited pregnant women, participating in any physical activity intervention (excluding interventions aimed entirely at body conditioning), compared with standard antenatal care (comparators), using device-measured total physical activity as an outcome were eligible for inclusion. METHODS: 3144 titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility, and 18 met the inclusion criteria. Data were analysed using random effect models, (standardised mean difference and mean difference), using data from baseline to last available follow-up (primary end point), and until between 24 to 30 weeks gestation. Gestational weight gain was also assessed at these timepoints in the included trials. RESULTS: No significant differences between the groups were found for total physical activity at last available follow-up or 24 to 30 weeks gestation (95% CI 0.03 to 0.27, p = 0.10: 95% CI -0.05 to 0.33, p = 0.15) respectively. On average, pregnant women randomised to a physical activity intervention completed 435 and 449 more steps per day than comparators at last available follow-up and at 24 to 30 weeks gestation (95% CI -0.5-870.6, p = 0.05: 95% CI 5.5-892.7, p = 0.05) respectively. Intervention participants also gained 0.69 kg less (95% CI -1.30 to -0.08, p = 0.03) weight than comparators. CONCLUSION: Based on device-measured data, interventions to promote physical activity during pregnancy have small but important effects on increasing physical activity and managing excessive gestational weight gain.

Cross-sectional associations between domain-specific sitting time and other lifestyle health behaviours: the Stormont study.

BACKGROUND: There is a dearth of literature on how different domains of sitting time relate to other health behaviours. Therefore, this study aimed to explore these associations in a sample of office workers. METHODS: 7170 Northern Irish Civil Servants completed an online survey which included information on workday and non-workday sitting time in five domains (travel, work, TV, computer-use, leisure-time), physical activity, fruit and vegetable intake, alcohol consumption and cigarette smoking. An unhealthy behaviour score was calculated by summing the number of health behaviours which did not meet the current guidelines. Multinomial regressions examined associations between unhealthy behaviour score and each domain of sitting time. RESULTS: ≥7 hours sitting at work and ≥2 hours TV viewing on a workday both more than doubled the odds of partaking in ≥3 unhealthy behaviours [Odds ratio, OR = 2.03, 95% CI, (1.59-2.61); OR = 2.19 (1.71-2.80)] and ≥3 hours of TV viewing on a non-workday nearly tripled the odds [OR = 2.96 (2.32-3.77)]. CONCLUSIONS: High sitting time at work and TV viewing on a workday and non-workday are associated with increased odds of partaking in multiple unhealthy behaviours. Interventions need to focus on these domains and public health policy should consider sitting time as an important health behaviour.

Implementing physical activity calorie equivalent (PACE) food labelling: Views of a nationally representative sample of adults in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Nutritional labels aim to support people to make informed healthy food choices, but many people do not understand the meaning of calories on food labels. Another approach is to provide calorie information with an interpretation of what the calorie content of food means for energy expenditure, known as physical activity calorie equivalent (PACE) labelling. PACE aims to illustrate how many minutes of physical activity are equivalent to the calories contained in food/drinks. This study investigated the views of the public about the possible implementation of PACE labelling. METHODS: Data was obtained from a nationally representative sample of adults in the United Kingdom and collected by UK Ipsos KnowledgePanel. Panellists are recruited via a random probability unclustered address-based sampling method. 4,000 panellists were randomly invited to participate and asked to compare their views about traffic light and PACE labelling preferences and behaviour parameters. RESULTS: Data were analysed descriptively and using logistic and multinomial regression analyses. 2,668/4,000 (67%) of those invited participated. More participants preferred traffic light (43%vs33%) than PACE labelling, but more reported PACE was easier to understand (41%vs27%) and more likely to catch their attention (49%vs31%). More participants thought PACE was more likely to help them avoid high calorie food than traffic light labelling (44%vs28%). Physically active (3-4 or 5+ days/week) respondents were more likely to report PACE would catch their attention than traffic light labelling, compared with less active participants (weighted adjusted relative risk ratio = 1.42 (1.00-2.00) and 1.45 (1.03-2.05 respectively)). Perceived overweight was the most predictive factor (weighted adjusted OR = 2.24 (1.19 to 4.20)) in whether PACE was considered useful in helping people decide what to eat/buy. CONCLUSION: The public identified value to their health in labelling food with PACE information. PACE labelling may be a useful approach to complement current approaches to food labelling.

Effects of physical activity interventions on physical activity and health outcomes in young people during treatment for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Objective: Physical activity may improve health and reduce the adverse effects of cancer and/or its treatment in young people, therefore, interventions that promote physical activity are important. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to synthesise evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have assessed the effectiveness of physical activity interventions on health outcomes in young people undergoing cancer treatment. Design: Systematic review with meta-analyses. Data sources: Embase, PubMed, Medline, PsycINFO, PsychArticles, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library were searched from inception to January 2022. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were RCTs, recruited young patients with cancer receiving cancer treatment and tested an aerobic physical activity intervention. Title/abstract reports were screened against the review eligibility criteria. Results: Searches revealed seven eligible trials that had recruited 317 participants. No differences were found in minutes per day of participation in moderate to vigorous intensity physical activity (MD 2.61, 95% CI -3.67 to 8.89, p=0.42), total physical activity (standardised mean difference, SMD 0.35, 95% CI -0.39 to 1.09, p=0.35) or fatigue (SMD -0.50, 95% CI -1.03 to 0.02, p=0.06). Sensitivity analyses where trials with a high risk of bias were excluded, revealed significant effects for total physical activity (SMD 0.87, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.57, p=0.02) and fatigue (SMD 0.74, 95% CI -1.13 to -0.35), p=0.0002). Conclusion: Evidence regarding the effects of physical activity interventions on the health of young people undergoing treatment for cancer is limited and mixed, where results from high-quality trials showed some promise.

Effectiveness of weight management interventions for adults delivered in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of behavioural weight management interventions for adults with obesity delivered in primary care. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials of behavioural weight management interventions for adults with a body mass index ≥25 delivered in primary care compared with no treatment, attention control, or minimal intervention and weight change at ≥12 months follow-up. DATA SOURCES: Trials from a previous systematic review were extracted and the search completed using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, PubMed, and PsychINFO from 1 January 2018 to 19 August 2021. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently identified eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Meta-analyses were conducted with random effects models, and a pooled mean difference for both weight (kg) and waist circumference (cm) were calculated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was weight change from baseline to 12 months. Secondary outcome was weight change from baseline to ≥24 months. Change in waist circumference was assessed at 12 months. RESULTS: 34 trials were included: 14 were additional, from a previous review. 27 trials (n=8000) were included in the primary outcome of weight change at 12 month follow-up. The mean difference between the intervention and comparator groups at 12 months was -2.3 kg (95% confidence interval -3.0 to -1.6 kg, I2=88%, P<0.001), favouring the intervention group. At ≥24 months (13 trials, n=5011) the mean difference in weight change was -1.8 kg (-2.8 to -0.8 kg, I2=88%, P<0.001) favouring the intervention. The mean difference in waist circumference (18 trials, n=5288) was -2.5 cm (-3.2 to -1.8 cm, I2=69%, P<0.001) in favour of the intervention at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioural weight management interventions for adults with obesity delivered in primary care are effective for weight loss and could be offered to members of the public. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021275529.

Effectiveness of physical activity interventions delivered or prompted by health professionals in primary care settings: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of physical activity interventions delivered or prompted by primary care health professionals for increasing moderate to vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA) in adult patients. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: Databases (Medline and Medline in progress, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Sports Medicine and Education Index, ASSIA, PEDro, Bibliomap, Science Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index), trial registries (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, TRoPHI), and grey literature (OpenGrey) sources were searched (from inception to September 2020). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials of aerobic based physical activity interventions delivered or prompted by health professionals in primary care with a usual care control group or another control group that did not involve physical activity. STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers screened the search results, extracted data from eligible trials and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool (version 2). Inverse variance meta-analyses using random effects models examined the primary outcome of difference between the groups in MVPA (min/week) from baseline to final follow-up. The odds of meeting the guidelines for MVPA at follow-up were also analysed. RESULTS: 14 566 unique reports were identified and 46 randomised controlled trials with a range of follow-ups (3-60 months) were included in the meta-analysis (n=16 198 participants). Physical activity interventions delivered or prompted by health professionals in primary care increased MVPA by 14 min/week (95% confidence interval 4.2 to 24.6, P=0.006). Heterogeneity was substantial (I2=91%, P<0.001). Limiting analyses to trials that used a device to measure physical activity showed no significant group difference in MVPA (mean difference 4.1 min/week, 95% confidence interval -1.7 to 9.9, P=0.17; I2=56%, P=0.008). Trials that used self-report measures showed that intervention participants achieved 24 min/week more MVPA than controls (95% confidence interval 6.3 to 41.8, P=0.008; I2=72%, P<0.001). Additionally, interventions increased the odds of patients meeting guidelines for MVPA by 33% (95% confidence interval 1.17 to 1.50, P<0.001; I2=25%, P=0.11) versus controls. 14 of 46 studies were at high risk of bias but sensitivity analyses excluding these studies did not alter the results. CONCLUSIONS: Physical activity interventions delivered or prompted by health professionals in primary care appear effective at increasing participation in self-reported MVPA. Such interventions should be considered for routine implementation to increase levels of physical activity and improve health outcomes in the population. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021209484.