Evidence Hub

Technology‐Enabled Exercise “Snacks” Are Feasible to Perform in a Real‐World Setting: A Randomized Controlled Trial

F. J. Babir, Hashim Islam, Sara McCreary, Erica Vaz, K. Falkenhain, K. Cranston, Mary Jung, J. Singer et al.

Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 2025

77 participants · 21 citations

Abstract

This randomized controlled trial investigated the feasibility and efficacy of a 12‐week remotely delivered exercise snacks intervention in the real world. Inactive adults (n = 77; 56 females, 21 males; mean age ± SD: 54 ± 6 years, mean VO2peak ± SD: 24.5 ± 4.4 mL/kg/min) were randomized to an exercise snacks (n = 38; bodyweight exercises) or a placebo exercise control group (n = 39; stretching exercises). Participants were encouraged to perform ≥ 3 exercise bouts/day (bouts were ≤ 1 min), ≥ 3 days/week delivered through an online platform. Feasibility outcomes included exercise adherence and enjoyment. The primary efficacy outcome was peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) at baseline and 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included rating of perceived exertion (RPE; 0–10 scale), exercise enjoyment scale (EES; 0–7), and blood biomarkers of cardiometabolic health. Seventy‐three participants completed the intervention and 71 completed at least one follow‐up testing measure. Adherence, based on total bouts from the online platform, exceeded the prescribed minimum and was not different between the exercise snacks (173 ± 74) and control (158 ± 92) groups (p = 0.37). RPE across the intervention was higher in the exercise snacks compared to the control group (3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 2.1 ± 0.6, respectively; p 0.05). There were no between‐group differences in the change in absolute (mean difference: 0.0 [95% CI: −0.1, 0.1] L/min) or relative (0.4 [−0.6, 1.4] mL/kg/min) VO2peak (p > 0.05). There were no…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 77 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free