OBJECTIVE: Attrition is a common problem in health behaviour change (HBC) trials. When the degree of attrition differs between treatment conditions, then this is called differential attrition and is regarded as a major threat to internal validity. The primary research question of this study was: how often and to what degree does differential attrition occur in HBC trials? DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis of a random selection of HBC trials (k = 60). We meta-analysed the relative attrition rates using a random-effects model and examined the relationship between the relative attrition rates and the potential moderators: the amount of human contact in delivery and the intensity of the intervention/control condition, the type of control condition, and the follow-up intensity and duration. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative attrition rates. RESULTS: The average attrition rate was 18% (SD = .15; M = .15) in the intervention and 17% (SD = .13; M = .13) in the control conditions. The estimated average relative attrition rate was 1.10 (95% CI: 1.01-1.20, p = .02), suggesting an overall higher attrition rate of 10% in the intervention conditions. This relative attrition rate was not related to any of the potential moderators. CONCLUSION: There is indication of a slightly higher amount of attrition on average in the intervention conditions of HBC trials.
OBJECTIVE: Attrition is a common problem in health behaviour change (HBC) trials. When the degree of attrition differs between treatment conditions, then this is called differential attrition and is regarded as a major threat to internal validity. The primary research question of this study was: how often and to what degree does differential attrition occur in HBC trials? DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis of a random selection of HBC trials (k = 60). We meta-analysed the relative attrition rates using a random-effects model and examined the relationship between the relative attrition rates and the potential moderators: the amount of human contact in delivery and the intensity of the intervention/control condition, the type of control condition, and the follow-up intensity and duration. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative attrition rates. RESULTS: The average attrition rate was 18% (SD = .15; M = .15) in the intervention and 17% (SD = .13; M = .13) in the control conditions. The estimated average relative attrition rate was 1.10 (95% CI: 1.01-1.20, p = .02), suggesting an overall higher attrition rate of 10% in the intervention conditions. This relative attrition rate was not related to any of the potential moderators. CONCLUSION: There is indication of a slightly higher amount of attrition on average in the intervention conditions of HBC trials.
Entities:
Keywords:
RCT; bias; differential attrition; health behaviour change; internal validity
Authors: Cathleen E Willging; Audrey Harkness; Tania Israel; David Ley; Patricia S Hokanson; Catherine DeMaria; Aaron Joplin; Verida Smiley Journal: Community Ment Health J Date: 2017-09-16
Authors: Jamilla A Hussain; Ian R White; Dean Langan; Miriam J Johnson; David C Currow; David J Torgerson; Martin Bland Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2015-12-21 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Lisa Lyssenko; Gerhard Müller; Nikolaus Kleindienst; Christian Schmahl; Mathias Berger; Georg Eifert; Alexander Kölle; Siegmar Nesch; Jutta Ommer-Hohl; Michael Wenner; Martin Bohus Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-08-01 Impact factor: 3.295