Rochelle Davis

Dr. Rochelle Davis

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

8Years (2019-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
23 July 2025 in The Lancet Public Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
DDDing Ding
Ding Ding
BNBinh Nguyen
Binh Nguyen
TNTracy Nau
Tracy Nau
MLMengyun Luo
Mengyun Luo
BPBorja del Pozo-Cruz
Borja del Pozo-Cruz
KOKatherine Owen
Katherine Owen
Despite the rapid increase in evidence from the past decade on daily steps and health-related outcomes, existing systematic reviews primarily focused on few outcomes, such as all-cause mortality. This study synthesised the prospective dose-response relationship between daily steps and health outcomes including all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, cancer, type 2 diabetes, cognitive outcomes, mental health outcomes, physical function, and falls. For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed and EBSCO CINAHL for literature published between Jan 1, 2014, and Feb 14, 2025, supplemented by other search strategies. Eligible prospective studies examined the relationship between device-measured daily steps and health outcomes among adults without restrictions on language or publication type. Pairs of reviewers (BN, KO, ML, and TN) independently did the study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the 9-point Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Hazard ratios (HRs) from individual studies were synthesised using random-effects dose-response meta-analysis where possible. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. This trial is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024529706). 57 studies from 35 cohorts were included in the systematic review and 31 studies from 24 cohorts were included in meta-analyses. For all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease incidence, dementia, and falls, an inverse non-linear dose-response association was found, with inflection points at around 5000-7000 steps per day. An inverse linear association was found for cardiovascular disease mortality, cancer incidence, cancer mortality, type 2 diabetes incidence, and depressive symptoms. Based on our meta-analyses, compared with 2000 steps per day, 7000 steps per day was associated with a 47% lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0·53 [95% CI 0·46-0·60]; I2=36·3; 14 studies), a 25% lower risk of cardiovascular disease incidence (HR 0·75 [0·67-0·85]; I2=38·3%; six studies), a 47% lower risk of cardiovascular disease mortality (HR 0·53 [0·37-0·77]; I2=78·2%; three studies), a non-significant 6% lower risk of cancer incidence (HR 0·94 [0·87-1·01]; I2=73·7%; two studies), a 37% lower risk of cancer mortality (HR 0·63 [0·55-0·72]; I2=64·5%; three studies), a 14% lower risk of type 2 diabetes (HR 0·86 [0·74-0·99]; I2=48·5%; four studies), a 38% lower risk of dementia (HR 0·62 [0·53-0·73]; I2=0%; two studies), a 22% lower risk of depressive symptoms (HR 0·78 [0·73-0·83]; I2=36·2%; three studies), and a 28% lower risk of falls (HR 0·72 [0·65-0·81]; I2=47·5%; four studies). Studies on physical function (not based on meta-analysis) reported similar inverse associations. The evidence certainty was moderate for all outcomes except for cardiovascular disease mortality (low), cancer incidence (low), physical function (low), and falls (very low). Although 10 000 steps per day can still be a viable target for those who are more active, 7000 steps per day is associated with clinically meaningful improvements in health outcomes and might be a more realistic and achievable target for some. The findings of the study should be interpreted in light of limitations, such as the small number of studies available for most outcomes, a lack of age-specific analysis and biases at the individual study level, including residual confounding. National Health and Medical Research Council, New South Wales Health, and Ian Potter Foundation.

11 April 2022 in Current Diabetes Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RDRochelle Davis
Rochelle Davis
MRMichelle L Rogers
Michelle L Rogers
Alison M. CoatesAlison M. Coates
Alison M. Coates
GLGloria Leung
Gloria Leung
MBMaxne Bonham
Maxne Bonham
Purpose of Review: The aim of this short review is to provide an updated commentary on the current literature examining the impact of meal timing on obesity and weight gain in adults. The potential mechanisms, including novel and emerging factors, behind timing of food intake across the 24-h period in the development of obesity, and dietary strategies manipulating meal timing to ameliorate weight gain are also explored. Recent Findings: Dietary patterns that feature meal timing outside of the regular daytime hours can contribute to circadian disruption as food is metabolised in opposition to internal daily rhythms and can feedback on the timekeeping mechanisms setting these rhythms. Epidemiological evidence examining the impact of late meal timing patterns is beginning to suggest that eating at night increases the risk of weight gain over time. Mechanisms contributing to this include changes to the efficiency of metabolism across the day, and dysregulation of appetite hormone and gut microbiota by mis-timed meals. Summary: When meals are eaten, in relation to the time of day, is increasingly considered of importance when implementing dietary change in order to address the growing burden of obesity, although further research is required in order to determine optimal patterns.

6 October 2019 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ESEmma Shaw
Emma Shaw
GLGloria Leung
Gloria Leung
JJJessica Jong
Jessica Jong
Alison M. CoatesAlison M. Coates
Alison M. Coates
RDRochelle Davis
Rochelle Davis
MBMaxne Bonham
Maxne Bonham
There is evidence to indicate that the central biological clock (i.e., our endogenous circadian system) plays a role in physiological processes in the body that impact energy regulation and metabolism. Cross-sectional data suggest that energy consumption later in the day and during the night is associated with weight gain. These findings have led to speculation that when, as well as what, we eat may be important for maintaining energy balance. Emerging literature suggests that prioritising energy intake to earlier during the day may help with body weight maintenance. Evidence from tightly controlled acute experimental studies indicates a disparity in the body’s ability to utilise (expend) energy equally across the day and night. Energy expenditure both at rest (resting metabolic rate) and after eating (thermic effect of food) is typically more efficient earlier during the day. In this review, we discuss the key evidence for a circadian pattern in energy utilisation and balance, which depends on meal timing. Whilst there is limited evidence that simply prioritising energy intake to earlier in the day is an effective strategy for weight loss, we highlight the potential benefits of considering the role of meal timing for improving metabolic health and energy balance. This review demonstrates that to advance our understanding of the contribution of the endogenous circadian system toward energy balance, targeted studies that utilise appropriate methodologies are required that focus on meal timing and frequency.


1 June 2021 in Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GLGloria Leung
Gloria Leung
RDRochelle Davis
Rochelle Davis
CHCatherine E. Huggins
Catherine E. Huggins
Robert WareRobert Ware
Robert Ware
MBMaxne Bonham
Maxne Bonham