Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19254929›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2009

Comparison of a phased experimental approach and a single randomized clinical trial for developing multicomponent behavioral interventions.

Linda M Collins, Bibhas Chakraborty, Susan A Murphy, Victor Strecher

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Group-based exercise interventions for increasing physical activity in cancer survivors: a systematic review of face-to-face randomized and non-randomized trials.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Preventing Smoking Progression in Young Adults: the Concept of Prevescalation.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Toward Usable Evidence: Optimizing Knowledge Accumulation in HCI Research on Health Behavior Change.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Linda M CollinsThe Methodology Center and Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Penn State, University Park, PA 16801, USA. lmcollins@psu.edu.
Bibhas Chakraborty
Susan A Murphy
Victor Strecher

Funding

THE REFINEMENT &APPLICATION OF MEDICAL DECISION MAKING IN PREVENTION SCIENCESP50DA010075 · NIDA · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY-UNIV PARK · PI LANZA, STEPHANIE T · 1996 to 2014
$24.5M
METHODOLOGY FOR DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION RESEARCHK05DA018206 · NIDA · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY-UNIV PARK · PI COLLINS, LINDA M · 2004 to 2008
$617k
NIDA NIH HHS K05 DA018206NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA010075NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA10075
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany interventions in today's health sciences are multicomponent, and often one or more of the components are behavioral. Two approaches to building behavioral interventions empirically can be identified. The more typically used approach, labeled here the classical approach, consists of constructing a likely best intervention a priori, and then evaluating the intervention in a standard randomized controlled trial (RCT). By contrast, the emergent phased experimental approach involves programmatic phases of empirical research and discovery aimed at identifying individual intervention component effects and the best combination of components and levels. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to provide a head-to-head comparison between the classical and phased experimental approaches and thereby highlight the relative advantages and disadvantages of these approaches when they are used to select program components and levels so as to arrive at the most potent intervention.

methodsA computer simulation was performed in which the classical and phased experimental approaches to intervention development were applied to the same randomly generated data.

resultsThe phased experimental approach resulted in better mean intervention outcomes when the intervention effect size was medium or large, whereas the classical approach resulted in better mean intervention outcomes when the effect size was small. The phased experimental approach led to identification of the correct set of intervention components and levels at a higher rate than the classical approach across all conditions. LIMITATIONS: Some potentially important factors were not varied in the simulation, for example the underlying structural model and the number of intervention components.

conclusionsThe phased experimental approach merits serious consideration, because it has the potential to enable intervention scientists to develop more efficacious behavioral interventions.

Indexed as

Behavior TherapyResearch DesignEffect Modifier, EpidemiologicHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSample Size

Identifiers

PMID19254929
PMCPMC2711350

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.