A multicenter controlled study for dementia prevention through physical, cognitive and social activities &amp;ndash; GESTALT-kompakt

Streber, Anna; Abu‐Omar, Karim; Hentschke, Christian; Rütten, Alfred

doi:10.2147/cia.s141163

Cited by 12 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One study provided participants with access to a study website and used text messages for intervention delivery [ 86 ]. Interventions providing PA education were often delivered in a group setting through a community-based approach, which allowed for the use of social support as a behavioral change technique [ 84 , 89 , 91 ]. Other behavioral change techniques included goal setting, behavioral counseling, and self-monitoring.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All but 2 studies [ 89 , 91 ] instructed participants to wear the device daily, either at all times or during waking hours, for the duration of the intervention. Using daily wear instructions, the number of days the device worn was commonly reported either as an average (6.6, SD 1.1 over 7 days) [ 91 ] or as a median (93% over 30 days) [ 94 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One study reported that 60% of participants in the intervention group used Fitbit at least 80% of the study time [ 85 ], whereas another study simply reported that Fitbit was worn on 98% of days during the intervention [ 86 ]. One study used a minimum wear time criterion (8 hours per day) but did not report adherence to the criterion [ 89 ]. One study excluded 2 participants who did not wear the device for at least half of the instructed wear period (14 days) [ 88 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Strategies used to promote wear time adherence included providing participants with wear instructions and reminders via phone calls and text messages [ 85 , 87 , 90 , 92 ]. Some studies also asked participants to upload PA data on a daily basis or to document the device wear time and day [ 89 , 91 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All but one study [88] used an additional measure of PA. Although self-reporting (using different scales) was the most common measure, which was used in 6 studies [86,[89][90][91][92]94], accelerometers were used in 4 studies [21,[84][85][86]. One study used a physical performance test along with a walk test [92].…”

Section: Other Measures Of Pamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Use of Fitbit Devices in Physical Activity Intervention Studies Across the Life Course: Narrative Review

Fleur¹,

George²,

Leite³

et al. 2021

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Commercial off-the-shelf activity trackers (eg, Fitbit) allow users to self-monitor their daily physical activity (PA), including the number of steps, type of PA, amount of sleep, and other features. Fitbits have been used as both measurement and intervention tools. However, it is not clear how they are being incorporated into PA intervention studies, and their use in specific age groups across the life course is not well understood. Objective This narrative review aims to characterize how PA intervention studies across the life course use Fitbit devices by synthesizing and summarizing information on device selection, intended use (intervention vs measurement tool), participant wear instructions, rates of adherence to device wear, strategies used to boost adherence, and the complementary use of other PA measures. This review provides intervention scientists with a synthesis of information that may inform future trials involving Fitbit devices. Methods We conducted a search of the Fitabase Fitbit Research Library, a database of studies published between 2012 and 2018. Of the 682 studies available on the Fitabase research library, 60 interventions met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. A supplemental search in PubMed resulted in the inclusion of 15 additional articles published between 2019 and 2020. A total of 75 articles were reviewed, which represented interventions conducted in childhood; adolescence; and early, middle, and older adulthood. Results There was considerable heterogeneity in the use of Fitbit within and between developmental stages. Interventions for adults typically required longer wear periods, whereas studies on children and adolescents tended to have more limited device wear periods. Most studies used developmentally appropriate behavior change techniques and device wear instructions. Regardless of the developmental stage and intended Fitbit use (ie, measurement vs intervention tool), the most common strategies used to enhance wear time included sending participants reminders through texts or emails and asking participants to log their steps or synchronize their Fitbit data daily. The rates of adherence to the wear time criteria were reported using varying metrics. Most studies supplemented the use of Fitbit with additional objective or self-reported measures for PA. Conclusions Overall, the heterogeneity in Fitbit use across PA intervention studies reflects its relative novelty in the field of research. As the use of monitoring devices continues to expand in PA research, the lack of uniformity in study protocols and metrics of reported measures represents a major issue for comparability purposes. There is a need for increased transparency in the prospective registration of PA intervention studies. Researchers need to provide a clear rationale for the use of several PA measures and specify the source of their main PA outcome and how additional measures will be used in the context of Fitbit-based interventions.

show abstract