Literature DB >> 35007787

Effectiveness of "run-ins" at predicting adherence in a behavioral weight loss efficacy trial.

Tricia M Leahey1, Loneke T Blackman Carr2, Zeely Denmat3, Denise Fernandes4, Amy A Gorin5.   

Abstract

There is limited research on whether run-in procedures predict participant adherence during behavioral efficacy trials. This study examined whether information from behavioral run-ins (food diary completion, questionnaire completion, and staff interview) predict intervention adherence, trial retention, and trial outcomes in a behavioral weight loss trial. Using run-in data, trial staff predicted which participants would have high, moderate, or low trial adherence. Participants with predicted high or moderate adherence were randomized. Results showed that predicted high adherers had better intervention adherence (session attendance and completion of self-monitoring records) and superior trial outcomes (i.e. weight loss). Run-in data did not predict trial retention. Results suggest that run-ins may be effective at identifying participants adherent to intervention protocols, thereby enhancing internal validity of behavioral efficacy trials.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Behavioral efficacy trial; Behavioral run-in; Intervention adherence; Trial outcomes; Trial retention; Weight loss

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35007787      PMCID: PMC8934261          DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2022.106678

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials        ISSN: 1551-7144            Impact factor:   2.226


  10 in total

Review 1.  Association of run-in periods with weight loss in obesity randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  O Affuso; K A Kaiser; T L Carson; K H Ingram; M Schwiers; H Robertson; F Abbas; D B Allison
Journal:  Obes Rev       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 9.213

2.  The Diabetes Prevention Program. Design and methods for a clinical trial in the prevention of type 2 diabetes.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  Readiness redefined: a behavioral task during screening predicted 1-year weight loss in the look AHEAD study.

Authors:  Adam G Tsai; Anthony N Fabricatore; Thomas A Wadden; Allison J Higginbotham; Andrea Anderson; John Foreyt; James O Hill; Robert W Jeffery; Marci E Gluck; Edward W Lipkin; Rebecca S Reeves; Brent Van Dorsten
Journal:  Obesity (Silver Spring)       Date:  2013-12-09       Impact factor: 5.002

Review 4.  The Look AHEAD study: a description of the lifestyle intervention and the evidence supporting it.

Authors:  Thomas A Wadden; Delia Smith West; Linda Delahanty; John Jakicic; Jack Rejeski; Don Williamson; Robert I Berkowitz; David E Kelley; Christine Tomchee; James O Hill; Shiriki Kumanyika
Journal:  Obesity (Silver Spring)       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 5.002

5.  Run-in periods in randomized trials: implications for the application of results in clinical practice.

Authors:  A Pablos-Méndez; R G Barr; S Shea
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-01-21       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Patient-provided e-support in reduced intensity obesity treatment: The INSPIRE randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Tricia M Leahey; Tania B Huedo-Medina; Andrea Grenga; Linda Gay; Denise Fernandes; Zeely Denmat; Caroline Doyle; Remei Areny-Joval; Rena R Wing
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 4.267

7.  Prerandomization run-in periods in randomized controlled trials of chronic diseases: a methodological study.

Authors:  David Collister; Jennifer C Rodrigues; Lawrence Mbuagbaw; P J Devereaux; Gordon Guyatt; William Herrington; Michael Walsh
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 8.  A comprehensive algorithm for determining whether a run-in strategy will be a cost-effective design modification in a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  K B Schechtman; M E Gordon
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1993-01-30       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Factors Associated With Noncompletion During the Run-In Period Before Randomization and Influence on the Estimated Benefit of LCZ696 in the PARADIGM-HF Trial.

Authors:  Akshay S Desai; Scott Solomon; Brian Claggett; John J V McMurray; Jean Rouleau; Karl Swedberg; Michael Zile; Martin Lefkowitz; Victor Shi; Milton Packer
Journal:  Circ Heart Fail       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 8.790

10.  Identifying Factors Associated With Dropout During Prerandomization Run-in Period From an mHealth Physical Activity Education Study: The mPED Trial.

Authors:  Yoshimi Fukuoka; Caryl Gay; William Haskell; Shoshana Arai; Eric Vittinghoff
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2015-04-13       Impact factor: 4.773

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.