Cited by 58Physical Activity and HealthDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Management and Education

Rationale, design and baseline data from the Pre-diabetes Risk Education and Physical Activity Recommendation and Encouragement (PREPARE) programme study: A randomized controlled trial

Open access
Yates, Thomas, Davies, Melanie, Gorely, Trish, Bull, Fiona, Khunti, Kamlesh·2008·Patient Education and Counseling

Abstract

Objective The PREPARE programme study is a randomized controlled trial which aims to determine whether structured education can be used to increase physical activity and improve glucose tolerance in individuals with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). This paper outlines the rationale, design and baseline data from the PREPARE programme study.Methods Individuals with IGT were recruited from ongoing diabetes screening programmes. Outcomes included an oral glucose tolerance test, physical activity (piezoelectric pedometer) and psychological determinants.Results 103 individuals (male n = 65; female n = 38) were recruited, 28% of whom were from a South Asian ethnic background. At baseline the participants' mean age and BMI were 64 +/- 9 years and 29.4 +/- 4.5 kg/m2 respectively. Steps per day were associated with 2-h glucose (p = -0.22, p = 0.03), fasting glucose (p = 0.22, p = 0.04), HDL-cholesterol (p = 0.23, p = 0.02), triglycerides (p = -0.22, p = 0.03) and body fat percentage (p = -0.26, p = 0.01). Mean self-efficacy scores were significantly (p < 0.01) higher for walking than for any other form of exercise. Participants reported high levels of concern about their IGT status but were confident that exercise would help treat/control IGT.Conclusion This study demonstrates the importance of developing effective physical activity and self-management programmes for individuals with IGT.Practice implications This study provides a detailed framework for the promotion of physical activity in a population identified with an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes which, if successful, could feasibly be implemented in a primary health care or community setting.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pec.2008.06.010

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Fewer RCTs solely targeted PA behavior in individuals with or at risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

    “Fewer RCTs solely targeted PA behavior in individuals with or at risk of developing type 2 diabetes ( 279 , 284 , 285 ).”

    From Exercise and Type 2 Diabetes (2010) · cites this paper as [284]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [13]13. Hillsdon M, Foster C, Cavill N, Crombie H, Naidoo B. The effectiveness of public health interventions for increasing physical activity among adults: a review of reviews. Health Development Agency, London: 2005
  2. [18]18. Davies MJ, Heller S, Campbell MJ, Carey ME, Dallosso HM, Daly H, Eaton S, Fox C, Rantell K, Rayman G, Skinner TC, Khunti K. Effectiveness of a structured education programme on individuals newly diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes: a cluster randomised controlled trial of the DESMOND programme. Brit Med J 2008;In press.
  3. [41]41. NICE. A rapid review of the effectiveness of pedometer interventions to promote physical activity in adults. London, UK: NICE Public Health Collaborating Centre - Physical activity, 2006.
  4. [43]43. Chaiken S. The heuristic model of persuation. In: Zanna MP, Olson JM, Herman CP, editors. Social influence: The Ontaio symposium. 5th ed. NJ: Erlbaum; 1987; 3- 39.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yates, T., Davies, M., Gorely, T., Bull, F., & Khunti, K.
Affiliations
  • Loughborough University (GB)
  • University of Leicester (GB)
Corresponding author
Yates, Thomas
Venue
Patient Education and Counseling
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-11
Volume
73
Issue
2
Pages
264-271
ISSN
0738-3991 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2036776864
Cited by
58
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Patient Education and Counseling (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Leicester Research Archive (University of Leicester) (submittedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Diabetes UK
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
impaired glucose tolerance, prediabetes, physical activity, structured education, glucose tolerance, type 2 diabetes prevention, self-efficacy, walking, pedometers, self-management, South Asian ethnicity, primary care, risk education
MeSH terms
Asia, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Self Care, Exercise, Walking, Glucose Intolerance, Monitoring, Ambulatory, Self Efficacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review