Remote and web 2.0 vs control: Physical activity
Remote and web 2.0 probably leads to higher dichotomous outcomes: 12 months Self‐reported physical activity… compared with control (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Remote and web 2.0 vs control Dichotomous outcomes: 12 months Self‐reported physical activity questionnaire · patients with promoting physical activity Remote and web 2.0 probably leads to higher dichotomous outcomes: 12 months Self‐reported physical activity… compared with control (moderate certainty). Remote and web 2.0 interventions for promoting physical activity (2013) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 1.42 [1.21, 1.66] | 1 study · 1089 participants | Moderate |
Remote and web 2.0 vs control Self‐reported physical activity: 24 months Self‐reported physical activity questionnaire · patients with promoting physical activity Remote and web 2.0 interventions for promoting physical activity (2013) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 1049 participants | Moderate |
Remote and web 2.0 vs control Self‐reported physical activity: 12 months · patients with promoting physical activity Remote and web 2.0 interventions for promoting physical activity (2013) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 9 studies · 4547 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Remote and web 2.0 interventions for promoting physical activity 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.