Literature DB >> 12462959

Going quasi: the premature disclosure effect in a randomized clinical trial.

Shauna L Shapiro1, Aurelio J Figueredo, Opher Caspi, Gary E Schwartz, Richard R Bootzin, Ana Maria Lopez, Douglas Lake.   

Abstract

This paper describes a randomized clinical trial investigating a stress management program for women with breast cancer, which inadvertently turned quasi-experimental. Due to logistical considerations, group assignment was disclosed to participants (n = 63) prior to baseline assessment. Analyses of baseline measures unexpectedly revealed statistically significant differences between groups on psychological functioning. We suggest that what appears to be failed randomization may in fact point toward an important phenomenon which we have termed premature disclosure effect (PDE). A hierarchical regression model, developed to help explain the PDE, accounted for 47% of the variance. The findings indicate the importance of considering participant belief, preferences, and attributes when designing research protocols and interventions. Potential implications of PDE for clinical research in behavioral medicine are discussed and specific statistical methodologies suggested.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12462959     DOI: 10.1023/a:1020693417427

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Behav Med        ISSN: 0160-7715


  9 in total

1.  An inventory for measuring depression.

Authors:  A T BECK; C H WARD; M MENDELSON; J MOCK; J ERBAUGH
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1961-06

Review 2.  Random sampling, randomization, and equivalence of contrasted groups in psychotherapy outcome research.

Authors:  L M Hsu
Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol       Date:  1989-02

3.  Mental attitudes to cancer: an additional prognostic factor.

Authors:  K W Pettingale; T Morris; S Greer; J L Haybittle
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-03-30       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Effects of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized experiments.

Authors:  T J Meyer; M M Mark
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 4.267

5.  Psychological concomitants of cancer: current state of research.

Authors:  S Greer; P M Silberfarb
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  1982-08       Impact factor: 7.723

6.  Psychological response to breast cancer: effect on outcome.

Authors:  S Greer; T Morris; K W Pettingale
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1979-10-13       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Psychobiological factors predicting the course of breast cancer.

Authors:  M R Jensen
Journal:  J Pers       Date:  1987-06

8.  The prevalence of psychiatric disorders among cancer patients.

Authors:  L R Derogatis; G R Morrow; J Fetting; D Penman; S Piasetsky; A M Schmale; M Henrichs; C L Carnicke
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1983-02-11       Impact factor: 56.272

  9 in total
  3 in total

Review 1.  Lessons to be learned from 25 years of research investigating psychosocial interventions for cancer patients.

Authors:  Anne Moyer; Sarah K Knapp-Oliver; Stephanie J Sohl; Stefan Schnieder; Anna H L Floyd
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2009 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.360

2.  Preference in random assignment: implications for the interpretation of randomized trials.

Authors:  Cathaleene Macias; Paul B Gold; William A Hargreaves; Elliot Aronson; Leonard Bickman; Paul J Barreira; Danson R Jones; Charles F Rodican; William H Fisher
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2009-05-12

3.  Health promotion in individuals with mental disorders: a cluster preference randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Nick Verhaeghe; Els Clays; Carine Vereecken; Jan De Maeseneer; Lea Maes; Cornelis Van Heeringen; Dirk De Bacquer; Lieven Annemans
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 3.295

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.