Investigating the rigour of research findings in experimental studies assessing the effects of breaking up prolonged sitting - extended scoping review.,Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy

当前位置： X-MOL 学术 › Braz. J. Phys. Ther. › 论文详情

Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)

Investigating the rigour of research findings in experimental studies assessing the effects of breaking up prolonged sitting - extended scoping review.
Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy ( IF 3.1 ) Pub Date : 2020-05-15 , DOI: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2020.04.007
Coralie English ₁ , Ishanka Weerasekara ₂ , Anjelica Carlos ₃ , Sebastien Chastin ₄ , Gary Crowfoot ₅ , Claire Fitzsimons ₆ , Anne Forster ₇ , Elizabeth Holliday ₈ , Heidi Janssen ₉ , Paul Mackie ₅ , Gillian Mead ₁₀ , David Dunstan ₁₁

Affiliation

School of Health Sciences and Priority Research Centre for Stroke and Brain Injury, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia; Centre for Research Excellence in Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, Australia.
School of Health Sciences and Priority Research Centre for Stroke and Brain Injury, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia; Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka.
School of Health Sciences and Priority Research Centre for Stroke and Brain Injury, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia; Hunter Stroke Service, Hunter New England Local Health District, Newcastle, Australia.
Department of Movement and Sport Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; School of Health and Life Science, Institute of Applied Health Research, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
School of Health Sciences and Priority Research Centre for Stroke and Brain Injury, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia; Centre for Research Excellence in Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation, Florey Institute of Neuroscience, Melbourne, Australia.
Physical Activity for Health Research Centre, Institute of Sport, Physical Education and Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Academic Unit of Elderly Care and Rehabilitation, University of Leeds, Bradford, UK.
School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia.
School of Health Sciences and Priority Research Centre for Stroke and Brain Injury, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia; Hunter Stroke Service, Hunter New England Local Health District, Newcastle, Australia; Centre for Research Excellence in Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation, Florey Institute of Neuroscience, Melbourne, Australia.
Geriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Physical Activity Laboratory, Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Australia; Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia.

Objectives

Sedentary behaviour research is a relatively new field, much of which has emerged since the widespread acceptance of clinical trial registration. The aim of this study was to investigate the trial registration and related issues in studies investigating the effect of frequent activity interruptions to prolonged sitting-time.

Methods

Secondary analysis of a scoping review including systematic searches of databases and trial registries. We included experimental studies investigating the effects of frequent activity interruptions to prolonged sitting-time.

Results

We identified 32 trials published in 45 papers. Only 16 (50%) trials were registered, with all 16 trials being completed and published. Of the unregistered trials, we identified three (19%) for which similarities in the sample size and participant demographics across papers was suggestive of duplicate publication. Identification of potential duplicate publications was difficult for the remaining 13 (81%). Results from 53 (76%) of the 70 registered outcomes were published, but 11 (69%) registered trials reported results from additional outcomes not prospectively registered. A total of 46 different outcomes (out of 53 reported outcome measures, similar measures were collated) were reported across all trials, 31 (67%) of which were collected in ≤2 trials.

Conclusions

We found direct evidence of trial registration issues in experimental trials of breaking up sitting-time. The lack of prospective registration of all trials, and the large number of outcomes measured per trial are key considerations for future research in this field. These issues are unlikely to be confined to the field of sedentary behaviour research.

中文翻译：

调查实验研究中研究结果的严谨性，评估打破长时间坐着的影响 - 扩展范围审查。

目标

久坐行为研究是一个相对较新的领域，其中大部分是在临床试验注册被广泛接受后出现的。本研究的目的是调查频繁活动中断对延长静坐时间影响的研究中的试验注册和相关问题。

方法

对范围界定审查进行二次分析，包括对数据库和试验登记处进行系统检索。我们纳入了实验研究，调查频繁中断活动对延长静坐时间的影响。

结果

我们确定了 45 篇论文中发表的 32 项试验。仅注册了 16 项试验（50%），所有 16 项试验均已完成并发表。在未注册的试验中，我们发现三项（19%）的论文样本量和参与者人口统计数据相似，表明存在重复发表。对于其余 13 个（81%）来说，识别潜在的重复出版物很困难。 70 项注册结果中有 53 项 (76%) 的结果已发表，但 11 项 (69%) 注册试验报告了未前瞻性注册的其他结果的结果。所有试验共报告了 46 种不同的结局（在 53 项报告的结局指标中，对相似的指标进行了整理），其中 31 项（67%）是在 ≤2 项试验中收集的。