BACKGROUND: The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) funded three institutions to conduct effectiveness trials of weight loss interventions in primary care settings. Unlike traditional multi-center clinical trials, each study was established as an independent trial with a distinct protocol. Still, efforts were made to coordinate and standardize several aspects of the trials. The three trials formed a collaborative group, the 'Practice-based Opportunities for Weight Reduction (POWER) Trials Collaborative Research Group.' PURPOSE: We describe the common and distinct features of the three trials, the key characteristics of the collaborative group, and the lessons learned from this novel organizational approach. METHODS: The Collaborative Research Group consists of three individual studies: 'Be Fit, Be Well' (Washington University in St. Louis/Harvard University), 'POWER Hopkins' (Johns Hopkins), and 'POWER-UP' (University of Pennsylvania). There are a total of 15 participating clinics with ~1100 participants. The common primary outcome is change in weight at 24 months of follow-up, but each protocol has trial-specific elements including different interventions and different secondary outcomes. A Resource Coordinating Unit at Johns Hopkins provides administrative support. RESULTS: The Collaborative Research Group established common components to facilitate potential cross-site comparisons. The main advantage of this approach is to develop and evaluate several interventions, when there is insufficient evidence to test one or two approaches, as would be done in a traditional multi-center trial. LIMITATIONS: The challenges of the organizational design include the complex decision-making process, the extent of potential data pooling, time intensive efforts to standardize reports, and the additional responsibilities of the DSMB to monitor three distinct protocols.
BACKGROUND: The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) funded three institutions to conduct effectiveness trials of weight loss interventions in primary care settings. Unlike traditional multi-center clinical trials, each study was established as an independent trial with a distinct protocol. Still, efforts were made to coordinate and standardize several aspects of the trials. The three trials formed a collaborative group, the 'Practice-based Opportunities for Weight Reduction (POWER) Trials Collaborative Research Group.' PURPOSE: We describe the common and distinct features of the three trials, the key characteristics of the collaborative group, and the lessons learned from this novel organizational approach. METHODS: The Collaborative Research Group consists of three individual studies: 'Be Fit, Be Well' (Washington University in St. Louis/Harvard University), 'POWER Hopkins' (Johns Hopkins), and 'POWER-UP' (University of Pennsylvania). There are a total of 15 participating clinics with ~1100 participants. The common primary outcome is change in weight at 24 months of follow-up, but each protocol has trial-specific elements including different interventions and different secondary outcomes. A Resource Coordinating Unit at Johns Hopkins provides administrative support. RESULTS: The Collaborative Research Group established common components to facilitate potential cross-site comparisons. The main advantage of this approach is to develop and evaluate several interventions, when there is insufficient evidence to test one or two approaches, as would be done in a traditional multi-center trial. LIMITATIONS: The challenges of the organizational design include the complex decision-making process, the extent of potential data pooling, time intensive efforts to standardize reports, and the additional responsibilities of the DSMB to monitor three distinct protocols.
Authors: Thomas A Wadden; Robert I Berkowitz; Leslie G Womble; David B Sarwer; Suzanne Phelan; Robert K Cato; Louise A Hesson; Suzette Y Osei; Rosalind Kaplan; Albert J Stunkard Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-11-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lawrence J Appel; Frank M Sacks; Vincent J Carey; Eva Obarzanek; Janis F Swain; Edgar R Miller; Paul R Conlin; Thomas P Erlinger; Bernard A Rosner; Nancy M Laranjo; Jeanne Charleston; Phyllis McCarron; Louise M Bishop Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-11-16 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Lester R Curtin; Margaret A McDowell; Carolyn J Tabak; Katherine M Flegal Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-04-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Pamela D Martin; Gareth R Dutton; Paula C Rhode; Ronald L Horswell; Donna H Ryan; Phillip J Brantley Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2008-09-11 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Hertzel C Gerstein; Michael E Miller; Robert P Byington; David C Goff; J Thomas Bigger; John B Buse; William C Cushman; Saul Genuth; Faramarz Ismail-Beigi; Richard H Grimm; Jeffrey L Probstfield; Denise G Simons-Morton; William T Friedewald Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-06-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Laura P Svetkey; Victor J Stevens; Phillip J Brantley; Lawrence J Appel; Jack F Hollis; Catherine M Loria; William M Vollmer; Christina M Gullion; Kristine Funk; Patti Smith; Carmen Samuel-Hodge; Valerie Myers; Lillian F Lien; Daniel Laferriere; Betty Kennedy; Gerald J Jerome; Fran Heinith; David W Harsha; Pamela Evans; Thomas P Erlinger; Arline T Dalcin; Janelle Coughlin; Jeanne Charleston; Catherine M Champagne; Alan Bauck; Jamy D Ard; Kathleen Aicher Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-03-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Kathleen M McTigue; Russell Harris; Brian Hemphill; Linda Lux; Sonya Sutton; Audrina J Bunton; Kathleen N Lohr Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-12-02 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Sheri Volger; Marion L Vetter; Megan Dougherty; Eva Panigrahi; Rebecca Egner; Victoria Webb; J Graham Thomas; David B Sarwer; Thomas A Wadden Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2011-07-14 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Leslie A Lytle; Laura P Svetkey; Kevin Patrick; Steven H Belle; I Diana Fernandez; John M Jakicic; Karen C Johnson; Christine M Olson; Deborah F Tate; Rena Wing; Catherine M Loria Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Steven H Belle; June Stevens; David Cella; Jennifer L Foltz; Catherine M Loria; David M Murray; Susan M Czajkowski; S Sonia Arteaga; Elizabeth Thom; Charlotte A Pratt Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Lawrence J Appel; Jeanne M Clark; Hsin-Chieh Yeh; Nae-Yuh Wang; Janelle W Coughlin; Gail Daumit; Edgar R Miller; Arlene Dalcin; Gerald J Jerome; Steven Geller; Gary Noronha; Thomas Pozefsky; Jeanne Charleston; Jeffrey B Reynolds; Nowella Durkin; Richard R Rubin; Thomas A Louis; Frederick L Brancati Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Thomas A Wadden; Sheri Volger; David B Sarwer; Marion L Vetter; Adam G Tsai; Robert I Berkowitz; Shiriki Kumanyika; Kathryn H Schmitz; Lisa K Diewald; Ronald Barg; Jesse Chittams; Reneé H Moore Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-11-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Wendy L Bennett; Nae-Yuh Wang; Kimberly A Gudzune; Arlene T Dalcin; Sara N Bleich; Lawrence J Appel; Jeanne M Clark Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2015-05-27
Authors: Sheri J Hartman; Patricia M Risica; Kim M Gans; Bess H Marcus; Charles B Eaton Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2014-06-15 Impact factor: 2.226