33 research outputs found
Effectiveness of an mHealth intervention combining a smartphone app and smart band on body composition in an overweight and obese population: Randomized controlled trial (EVIDENT 3 study)
Background: Mobile health (mHealth) is currently among the supporting elements that may contribute to an improvement in health markers by helping people adopt healthier lifestyles. mHealth interventions have been widely reported to achieve greater weight loss than other approaches, but their effect on body composition remains unclear.
Objective: This study aimed to assess the short-term (3 months) effectiveness of a mobile app and a smart band for losing weight and changing body composition in sedentary Spanish adults who are overweight or obese.
Methods: A randomized controlled, multicenter clinical trial was conducted involving the participation of 440 subjects from primary care centers, with 231 subjects in the intervention group (IG; counselling with smartphone app and smart band) and 209 in the control group (CG; counselling only). Both groups were counselled about healthy diet and physical activity. For the 3-month intervention period, the IG was trained to use a smartphone app that involved self-monitoring and tailored feedback, as well as a smart band that recorded daily physical activity (Mi Band 2, Xiaomi). Body composition was measured using the InBody 230 bioimpedance device (InBody Co., Ltd), and physical activity was measured using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire.
Results: The mHealth intervention produced a greater loss of body weight (–1.97 kg, 95% CI –2.39 to –1.54) relative to standard counselling at 3 months (–1.13 kg, 95% CI –1.56 to –0.69). Comparing groups, the IG achieved a weight loss of 0.84 kg more than the CG at 3 months. The IG showed a decrease in body fat mass (BFM; –1.84 kg, 95% CI –2.48 to –1.20), percentage of body fat (PBF; –1.22%, 95% CI –1.82% to 0.62%), and BMI (–0.77 kg/m2, 95% CI –0.96 to 0.57). No significant changes were observed in any of these parameters in men; among women, there was a significant decrease in BMI in the IG compared with the CG. When subjects were grouped according to baseline BMI, the overweight group experienced a change in BFM of –1.18 kg (95% CI –2.30 to –0.06) and BMI of –0.47 kg/m2 (95% CI –0.80 to –0.13), whereas the obese group only experienced a change in BMI of –0.53 kg/m2 (95% CI –0.86 to –0.19). When the data were analyzed according to physical activity, the moderate-vigorous physical activity group showed significant changes in BFM of –1.03 kg (95% CI –1.74 to –0.33), PBF of –0.76% (95% CI –1.32% to –0.20%), and BMI of –0.5 kg/m2 (95% CI –0.83 to –0.19).
Conclusions: The results from this multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial study show that compared with standard counselling alone, adding a self-reported app and a smart band obtained beneficial results in terms of weight loss and a reduction in BFM and PBF in female subjects with a BMI less than 30 kg/m2 and a moderate-vigorous physical activity level. Nevertheless, further studies are needed to ensure that this profile benefits more than others from this intervention and to investigate modifications of this intervention to achieve a global effect
Spread of a SARS-CoV-2 variant through Europe in the summer of 2020.
Following its emergence in late 2019, the spread of SARS-CoV-21,2 has been tracked by phylogenetic analysis of viral genome sequences in unprecedented detail3–5. Although the virus spread globally in early 2020 before borders closed, intercontinental travel has since been greatly reduced. However, travel within Europe resumed in the summer of 2020. Here we report on a SARS-CoV-2 variant, 20E (EU1), that was identified in Spain in early summer 2020 and subsequently spread across Europe. We find no evidence that this variant has increased transmissibility, but instead demonstrate how rising incidence in Spain, resumption of travel, and lack of effective screening and containment may explain the variant’s success. Despite travel restrictions, we estimate that 20E (EU1) was introduced hundreds of times to European countries by summertime travellers, which is likely to have undermined local efforts to minimize infection with SARS-CoV-2. Our results illustrate how a variant can rapidly become dominant even in the absence of a substantial transmission advantage in favourable epidemiological settings. Genomic surveillance is critical for understanding how travel can affect transmission of SARS-CoV-2, and thus for informing future containment strategies as travel resumes. © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited
Atlas de las praderas marinas de España
Knowledge of the distribution and extent of seagrass habitats is currently the basis of management and conservation policies of the coastal zones in most European countries. This basic information is being requested through European directives for the establishment of monitoring programmes and the implementation of specific actions to preserve the marine environment. In addition, this information is crucial for the quantification of the ecological importance usually attributed to seagrass habitats due to, for instance, their involvement in biogeochemical cycles, marine biodiversity and quality of coastal waters or global carbon budgets. The seagrass atlas of Spain represents a huge collective effort performed by 84 authors across 30 Spanish institutions largely involved in the scientific research, management and conservation of seagrass habitats during the last three decades. They have contributed to the availability of the most precise and realistic seagrass maps for each region of the Spanish coast which have been integrated in a GIS to obtain the distribution and area of each seagrass species. Most of this information has independently originated at a regional level by regional governments, universities and public research organisations, which explain the elevated heterogeneity in criteria, scales, methods and objectives of the available information. On this basis, seagrass habitats in Spain occupy a total surface of 1,541,63 km2, 89% of which is concentrated in the Mediterranean regions; the rest is present in sheltered estuarine areas of the Atlantic peninsular regions and in the open coastal waters of the Canary Islands, which represents 50% of the Atlantic meadows. Of this surface, 71.5% corresponds to Posidonia oceanica, 19.5% to Cymodocea nodosa, 3.1% to Zostera noltii (=Nanozostera noltii), 0.3% to Zostera marina and 1.2% to Halophila decipiens. Species distribution maps are presented (including Ruppia spp.), together with maps of the main impacts and pressures that has affected or threatened their conservation status, as well as the management tools established for their protection and conservation. Despite this considerable effort, and the fact that Spain has mapped wide shelf areas, the information available is still incomplete and with weak precision in many regions, which will require an investment of major effort in the near future to complete the whole picture and respond to demands of EU directives
Atlas de las praderas marinas de España
Knowledge of the distribution and extent of seagrass habitats is currently the basis of management and conservation policies of the coastal zones in most European countries. This basic information is being requested through European directives for the establishment of monitoring programmes and the implementation of specific actions to preserve the marine environment. In addition, this information is crucial for the quantification of the ecological importance usually attributed to seagrass habitats due to, for instance, their involvement in biogeochemical cycles, marine biodiversity and quality of coastal waters or global carbon budgets. The seagrass atlas of Spain represents a huge collective effort performed by 84 authors across 30 Spanish institutions largely involved in the scientific research, management and conservation of seagrass habitats during the last three decades. They have contributed to the availability of the most precise and realistic seagrass maps for each region of the Spanish coast which have been integrated in a GIS to obtain the distribution and area of each seagrass species. Most of this information has independently originated at a regional level by regional governments, universities and public research organisations, which explain the elevated heterogeneity in criteria, scales, methods and objectives of the available information. On this basis, seagrass habitats in Spain occupy a total surface of 1,541,63 km2, 89% of which is concentrated in the Mediterranean regions; the rest is present in sheltered estuarine areas of the Atlantic peninsular regions and in the open coastal waters of the Canary Islands, which represents 50% of the Atlantic meadows. Of this surface, 71.5% corresponds to Posidonia oceanica, 19.5% to Cymodocea nodosa, 3.1% to Zostera noltii (=Nanozostera noltii), 0.3% to Zostera marina and 1.2% to Halophila decipiens. Species distribution maps are presented (including Ruppia spp.), together with maps of the main impacts and pressures that has affected or threatened their conservation status, as well as the management tools established for their protection and conservation. Despite this considerable effort, and the fact that Spain has mapped wide shelf areas, the information available is still incomplete and with weak precision in many regions, which will require an investment of major effort in the near future to complete the whole picture and respond to demands of EU directives.Versión del edito
Recommended from our members
Gaia Early Data Release 3: The celestial reference frame (Gaia-CRF3)
Context. Gaia-CRF3 is the celestial reference frame for positions and proper motions in the third release of data from the Gaia mission, Gaia DR3 (and for the early third release, Gaia EDR3, which contains identical astrometric results). The reference frame is defined by the positions and proper motions at epoch 2016.0 for a specific set of extragalactic sources in the (E)DR3 catalogue. Aims. We describe the construction of Gaia-CRF3 and its properties in terms of the distributions in magnitude, colour, and astrometric quality. Methods. Compact extragalactic sources in Gaia DR3 were identified by positional cross-matching with 17 external catalogues of quasi-stellar objects (QSO) and active galactic nuclei (AGN), followed by astrometric filtering designed to remove stellar contaminants. Selecting a clean sample was favoured over including a higher number of extragalactic sources. For the final sample, the random and systematic errors in the proper motions are analysed, as well as the radio-optical offsets in position for sources in the third realisation of the International Celestial Reference Frame (ICRF3). Results. Gaia-CRF3 comprises about 1.6 million QSO-like sources, of which 1.2 million have five-parameter astrometric solutions in Gaia DR3 and 0.4 million have six-parameter solutions. The sources span the magnitude range G = 13-21 with a peak density at 20.6 mag, at which the typical positional uncertainty is about 1 mas. The proper motions show systematic errors on the level of 12 μas yr-1 on angular scales greater than 15 deg. For the 3142 optical counterparts of ICRF3 sources in the S/X frequency bands, the median offset from the radio positions is about 0.5 mas, but it exceeds 4 mas in either coordinate for 127 sources. We outline the future of Gaia-CRF in the next Gaia data releases. Appendices give further details on the external catalogues used, how to extract information about the Gaia-CRF3 sources, potential (Galactic) confusion sources, and the estimation of the spin and orientation of an astrometric solution
Gaia Data Release 3: reflectance spectra of Solar System small bodies
Stars and planetary system
Gaia Early Data Release 3: the Gaia catalogue of nearby stars
Stars and planetary system
Gaia Early Data Release 3: acceleration of the solar system from Gaia astrometry
Stars and planetary system
Gaia early data release 3: summary of the contents and survey properties (Corrigendum)
ERRATUMThis article is an erratum for:[https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/202039657]Instrumentatio