IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0075398.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Personalised Feedback about Physical Activity on Change in Objectively Measured Physical Activity (the FAB Study): A Randomised Controlled Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Job G Godino
  • Clare Watkinson
  • Kirsten Corder
  • Theresa M Marteau
  • Stephen Sutton
  • Stephen J Sharp
  • Simon J Griffin
  • Esther M F van Sluijs

Abstract

Background: Low levels of physical activity are a major public health concern, and interventions to promote physical activity have had limited success. Whether or not personalised feedback about physical activity following objective measurement motivates behaviour change has yet to be rigorously examined. Methods: And Findings: In a parallel group, open randomised controlled trial, 466 healthy adults aged 32 to 54 years were recruited from the ongoing population-based Fenland Study (Cambridgeshire, UK). Participants were randomised to receive either no feedback until the end of the trial (control group, n=120) or one of three different types of feedback: simple, visual, or contextualised (intervention groups, n=346). The primary outcome was physical activity (physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) in kJ/kg/day and average body acceleration (ACC) in m/s2) measured objectively using a combined heart rate monitor and accelerometer (Actiheart®). The main secondary outcomes included self-reported physical activity, intention to increase physical activity, and awareness of physical activity (the agreement between self-rated and objectively measured physical activity). At 8 weeks, 391 (83.9%) participants had complete physical activity data. The intervention had no effect on objectively measured physical activity (PAEE: β=-0.92, 95% CI=-3.50 to 1.66, p=0.48 and ACC: β=0.01, 95% CI=-0.00 to 0.02, p=0.21), self-reported physical activity (β=-0.39, 95% CI=-1.59 to 0.81), or intention to increase physical activity (β=-0.05, 95% CI=-0.22 to 0.11). However, it was associated with an increase in awareness of physical activity (OR=1.74, 95% CI=1.05 to 2.89). Results did not differ according to the type of feedback. Conclusions: Personalised feedback about physical activity following objective measurement increased awareness but did not result in changes in physical activity in the short term. Measurement and feedback may have a role in promoting behaviour change but are ineffective on their own. Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN92551397 http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN92551397

Suggested Citation

  • Job G Godino & Clare Watkinson & Kirsten Corder & Theresa M Marteau & Stephen Sutton & Stephen J Sharp & Simon J Griffin & Esther M F van Sluijs, 2013. "Impact of Personalised Feedback about Physical Activity on Change in Objectively Measured Physical Activity (the FAB Study): A Randomised Controlled Trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-1, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0075398
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075398
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0075398
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0075398&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0075398?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0075398. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.