BACKGROUND: Behavioral interventions to prevent pediatric obesity have shown inconsistent results across the field. Studying what happens within the "black box" of these interventions and how differences in implementation lead to different outcomes will help researchers develop more effective interventions. AIM: To compare the implementation of three features of a phone-based intervention for parents (time spent discussing weight-related behaviors, behavior change techniques used in sessions, and intervention activities implemented by parents between sessions) with study outcomes. METHODS: A random selection of 100 parent-child dyads in the intervention arm of a phone-based obesity prevention trial was included in this analysis. Sessions were coded for overall session length, length of time spent discussing specific weight-related behaviors, number of behavior change techniques used during the sessions, and number of intervention-recommended activities implemented by the parents between sessions (e.g., parent-reported implementation of behavioral practice/rehearsal between sessions). The primary study outcome, prevention of unhealthy increase in child body mass index (BMI) percentile, was measured at baseline and 12 months. RESULTS: Overall session length was associated with decreases in child BMI percentile ( b = -0.02, p = .01). There was no association between the number of behavior change techniques used in the sessions and decreases in child BMI percentile ( b = -0.29, p = .27). The number of activities the parents reported implementing between sessions was associated with decreases in child BMI percentile ( b = -1.25, p = .02). DISCUSSION: To improve future interventions, greater attention should be paid to the intended and delivered session length, and efforts should be made to facilitate parents' implementation of intervention-recommended activities between sessions (ClinicalTrials.gov, No. NCT01084590).
BACKGROUND: Behavioral interventions to prevent pediatric obesity have shown inconsistent results across the field. Studying what happens within the "black box" of these interventions and how differences in implementation lead to different outcomes will help researchers develop more effective interventions. AIM: To compare the implementation of three features of a phone-based intervention for parents (time spent discussing weight-related behaviors, behavior change techniques used in sessions, and intervention activities implemented by parents between sessions) with study outcomes. METHODS: A random selection of 100 parent-child dyads in the intervention arm of a phone-based obesity prevention trial was included in this analysis. Sessions were coded for overall session length, length of time spent discussing specific weight-related behaviors, number of behavior change techniques used during the sessions, and number of intervention-recommended activities implemented by the parents between sessions (e.g., parent-reported implementation of behavioral practice/rehearsal between sessions). The primary study outcome, prevention of unhealthy increase in child body mass index (BMI) percentile, was measured at baseline and 12 months. RESULTS: Overall session length was associated with decreases in child BMI percentile ( b = -0.02, p = .01). There was no association between the number of behavior change techniques used in the sessions and decreases in child BMI percentile ( b = -0.29, p = .27). The number of activities the parents reported implementing between sessions was associated with decreases in child BMI percentile ( b = -1.25, p = .02). DISCUSSION: To improve future interventions, greater attention should be paid to the intended and delivered session length, and efforts should be made to facilitate parents' implementation of intervention-recommended activities between sessions (ClinicalTrials.gov, No. NCT01084590).
Authors: William J Heerman; Meghan M JaKa; Jerica M Berge; Erika S Trapl; Evan C Sommer; Lauren R Samuels; Natalie Jackson; Jacob L Haapala; Alicia S Kunin-Batson; Barbara A Olson-Bullis; Heather K Hardin; Nancy E Sherwood; Shari L Barkin Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2017-11-15 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Susan Michie; Caroline E Wood; Marie Johnston; Charles Abraham; Jill J Francis; Wendy Hardeman Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Vidhu V Thaker; Stavroula K Osganian; Sarah D deFerranti; Kendrin R Sonneville; Jennifer K Cheng; Henry A Feldman; Tracy K Richmond Journal: BMC Pediatr Date: 2020-06-10 Impact factor: 2.125
Authors: Melissa N Poulsen; Jennifer Franceschelli Hosterman; G Craig Wood; Adam Cook; Lyndell Wright; Scott T Jamieson; Allison Naylor; Shawnee Lutcher; Jacob Mowery; Christopher J Seiler; Gregory J Welk; Lisa Bailey-Davis Journal: Front Nutr Date: 2022-07-11
Authors: Debapriya Chakraborty; Bronwyn A Bailey; Anna Lene Seidler; Serene Yoong; Kylie E Hunter; Rebecca K Hodder; Angela C Webster; Brittany J Johnson Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2022-07-22