Dataset Information

Social media interventions for diet and exercise behaviours: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To conduct a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining the use of social media to promote healthy diet and exercise in the general population.

Data sources

MEDLINE, CENTRAL, ERIC, PubMed, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, Alt Health Watch, Health Source, Communication and Mass Media Complete, Web of Knowledge and ProQuest Dissertation and Thesis (2000-2013).

Study eligibility criteria

RCTs of social media interventions promoting healthy diet and exercise behaviours in the general population were eligible. Interventions using social media, alone or as part of a complex intervention, were included.

Study appraisal and synthesis

Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. We describe the studies according to the target populations, objectives and nature of interventions, outcomes examined, and results and conclusions. We extracted data on the primary and secondary outcomes examined in each study. Where the same outcome was assessed in at least three studies, we combined data in a meta-analysis.

Results

22 studies were included. Participants were typically middle-aged Caucasian women of mid-to-high socioeconomic status. There were a variety of interventions, comparison groups and outcomes. All studies showed a decrease in programme usage throughout the intervention period. Overall, no significant differences were found for primary outcomes which varied across studies. Meta-analysis showed no significant differences in changes in physical activity (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.13 (95% CI -0.04 to 0.30), 12 studies) and weight (SMD -0.00 (95% CI -0.19 to 0.19), 10 studies); however, pooled results from five studies showed a significant decrease in dietary fat consumption with social media (SMD -0.35 (95% CI -0.68 to -0.02)).

Conclusions

Social media may provide certain advantages for public health interventions; however, studies of social media interventions to date relating to healthy lifestyles tend to show low levels of participation and do not show significant differences between groups in key outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Williams G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3927930 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeThis review aimed to (1) evaluate the effectiveness of social media-based interventions for improving the quality of life, anxiety and depressive symptoms of patients with cancer at post-intervention and follow-up; (2) identify the essential features of social media-based interventions and (3) explore the covariates of the treatment effect.MethodsAll types of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Ten electronic databases, clinical trial registries and grey literature sources were searched from inception to 15 December 2021. Stata software was used to perform meta-analysis, subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses. Individual quality assessment and certainty of evidence were assessed using Cochrane risk of bias tool version 1 and Grading of Recommendations Assessments, Development and Evaluation criteria, respectively.ResultsThis review included 43 RCTs, which comprised 6239 patients with a total mean age of 49.71 years old from across 11 countries. Social media-based interventions significantly improved the quality of life (g = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.05-0.45) and anxiety symptoms (g = - 0.41, 95% CI = - 0.76-0.07) but not depressive symptoms. The essential features based on the subgroup analysis concluded that using a mobile device with a flexible frequency had a remarkably greater effect on the quality of life and anxiety symptoms than their counterparts. The meta-regression showed the covariate features, where having more social media features in interventions significantly improved the quality of life (β = 0.21, p = 0.01). The certainty of evidence was very low for all outcomes.ConclusionsParticipants who received social media-based interventions may experience an increase in quality of life and reduction in anxiety symptoms.Implications for cancer survivorsSocial media-based interventions may complement usual care in improving quality of life and anxiety symptoms. Registration in PROSPERO CRD42022297956.

Project description:BackgroundNoncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading cause of death globally. Promoting physical activity and healthy eating is essential to help manage the NCD burden and reduce mortality. Social media may be a potential platform for delivering and scaling health promotion initiatives. In this systematic review, we aimed to examine i) the feasibility and acceptability of social media interventions targeting physical activity and/or diet for people with NCDs, ii) the effectiveness of improving exercise and diet behaviours, iii) specific design components used to promote user engagement and iv) the effectiveness on other health outcomes.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Google Scholar, CINAHL, EMBASE, and SPORTDiscus from inception until June 2021. Social media interventions targeting physical activity and/or diet were included. Participants were any age, with a diagnosis of one of the following categories of NCDs; cardiovascular disease, cancer, chronic respiratory disease, diabetes or mental illness. Interventions using social media alone or as part of an intervention with other modes of delivery were included. Eligible study designs were randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials, feasibility or pilot studies, or quasi-experimental studies.ResultsA total of 2358 publications were identified. After removal of duplicates, 2233 publication titles and abstracts were screened, and 10 publications were eligible, describing 8 individual studies. The study designs included five RCTs and three pilot or feasibility studies, all published between 2016 and 2020. Sample sizes ranged from n = 11 to n = 312. Half of the studies were conducted in the United States of America. Clinical populations included severe mental illness (2 studies), cardiovascular disease (2 studies), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (2 studies), cancer (1 study) and Type 2 diabetes (1 study). Facebook (three studies) and WeChat (three studies) were the most used social media platforms. The majority utilised social media to deliver health education and facilitate social support and all studies reported >70% retention. Four of the five included RCTS reported significant improvements in exercise behaviours (e.g., step count, exercise capacity) while diet was only assessed in two studies and results were non-significant.ConclusionsSocial media interventions appear to be feasible and acceptable among specific NCD populations and preliminary evidence suggests interventions they may be effective for improving exercise behaviours. The evidence for diet behaviours remains unclear. While overall there is an emerging evidence base, more rigorous evaluation including replication studies are needed to determine the efficacy of social media interventions.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Torture and other forms of ill treatment have been reported in at least 141 countries, exposing a global crisis. Survivors face multiple physical, psychological, and social difficulties. Psychological consequences for survivors are varied, and evidence on treatment is mixed. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the benefits and harms of psychological, social, and welfare interventions for torture survivors. METHODS AND FINDINGS:We updated a 2014 review with published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for adult survivors of torture comparing any psychological, social, or welfare intervention against treatment as usual or active control from 1 January 2014 through 22 June 2019. Primary outcome was post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms or caseness, and secondary outcomes were depression symptoms, functioning, quality of life, and adverse effects, after treatment and at follow-up of at least 3 months. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios were estimated using meta-analysis with random effects. The Cochrane tool was used to derive risk of bias. Fifteen RCTs were included, with data from 1,373 participants (589 females and 784 males) in 10 countries (7 trials in Europe, 5 in Asia, and 3 in Africa). No trials of social or welfare interventions were found. Compared to mostly inactive (waiting list) controls, psychological interventions reduced PTSD symptoms by the end of treatment (SMD -0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.52 to -0.09, p = 0.005), but PTSD symptoms at follow-up were not significantly reduced (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.74 to 0.06, p = 0.09). No significant improvement was found for PTSD caseness at the end of treatment, and there was possible worsening at follow-up from one study (n = 28). Interventions showed no benefits for depression symptoms at end of treatment (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.50 to 0.03, p = 0.09) or follow-up (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.70 to 0.24, p = 0.34). A significant improvement in functioning for psychological interventions compared to control was found at end of treatment (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.18, p = 0.0002) but not at follow-up from only one study. No significant improvement emerged for quality of life at end of treatment (SMD 0.38, 95% CI -0.28 to 1.05, p = 0.26) with no data available at follow-up. The main study limitations were the difficulty in this field of being certain of capturing all eligible studies, the lack of modelling of maintenance of treatment gains, and the low precision of most SMDs making findings liable to change with the addition of further studies as they are published. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings show evidence that psychological interventions improve PTSD symptoms and functioning at the end of treatment, but it is unknown whether this is maintained at follow-up, with a possible worsening of PTSD caseness at follow-up from one study. Further interventions in this population should address broader psychological needs beyond PTSD while taking into account the effect of multiple daily stressors. Additional studies, including social and welfare interventions, will improve precision of estimates of effect, particularly over the longer term.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Randomised controlled trials (RCT) are the gold standard to provide unbiased data. However, when patients have a treatment preference, randomisation may influence participation and outcomes (eg, external and internal validity). The aim of this study was to assess the influence of patients' preference in RCTs by analysing partially randomised patient preference trials (RPPT); an RCT and preference cohort combined. DESIGN:Systematic review and meta-analyses. DATA SOURCES:MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES:RPPTs published between January 2005 and October 2018 reporting on allocation of patients to randomised and preference cohorts were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Two independent reviewers extracted data. The main outcomes were the difference in external validity (participation and baseline characteristics) and internal validity (lost to follow-up, crossover and the primary outcome) between the randomised and the preference cohort within each RPPT, compared in a meta-regression using a Wald test. Risk of bias was not assessed, as no quality assessment for RPPTs has yet been developed. RESULTS:In total, 117 of 3734 identified articles met screening criteria and 44 were eligible (24 873 patients). The participation rate in RPPTs was >95% in 14 trials (range: 48%-100%) and the randomisation refusal rate was >50% in 26 trials (range: 19%-99%). Higher education, female, older age, race and prior experience with one treatment arm were characteristics of patients declining randomisation. The lost to follow-up and cross-over rate were significantly higher in the randomised cohort compared with the preference cohort. Following the meta-analysis, the reported primary outcomes were comparable between both cohorts of the RPPTs, mean difference 0.093 (95% CI -0.178 to 0.364, p=0.502). CONCLUSIONS:Patients' preference led to a substantial proportion of a specific patient group refusing randomisation, while it did not influence the primary outcome within an RPPT. Therefore, RPPTs could increase external validity without compromising the internal validity compared with RCTs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42019094438.

Project description:INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and the optimal type and volume of aerobic exercise (AE) in fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) are not established. We therefore assessed the efficacy of different types and volumes of AE in FMS. METHODS: The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsychInfo and SPORTDISCUS (through April 2009) and the reference sections of original studies and systematic reviews on AE in FMS were systematically reviewed. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of AE compared with controls (treatment as usual, attention placebo, active therapy) and head-to-head comparisons of different types of AE were included. Two authors independently extracted articles using predefined data fields, including study quality indicators. RESULTS: Twenty-eight RCTs comparing AE with controls and seven RCTs comparing different types of AE with a total of 2,494 patients were reviewed. Effects were summarised using standardised mean differences (95% confidence intervals) by random effect models. AE reduced pain (-0.31 (-0.46, -0.17); P<0.001), fatigue (-0.22 (-0.38, -0.05); P=0.009), depressed mood (-0.32 (-0.53, -0.12); P=0.002) and limitations of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (-0.40 (-0.60, -0.20); P<0.001), and improved physical fitness (0.65 (0.38, 0.95); P<0.001), post treatment. Pain was significantly reduced post treatment by land-based and water-based AE, exercises with slight to moderate intensity and frequency of two or three times per week. Positive effects on depressed mood, HRQOL and physical fitness could be maintained at follow-up. Continuing exercise was associated with positive outcomes at follow-up. Risks of bias analyses did not change the robustness of the results. Few studies reported a detailed exercise protocol, thus limiting subgroup analyses of different types of exercise. CONCLUSIONS: An aerobic exercise programme for FMS patients should consist of land-based or water-based exercises with slight to moderate intensity two or three times per week for at least 4 weeks. The patient should be motivated to continue exercise after participating in an exercise programme.