Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24993013›Full record

SynthesisObesity facts2014

Unbalanced baseline in school-based interventions to prevent obesity: adjustment can lead to bias - a systematic review.

Rosely Sichieri, Diana Barbosa Cunha

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Obesity facts, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rosely SichieriDepartment of Epidemiology, Institute of Social Medicine, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Diana Barbosa Cunha
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsCluster designs favor unbalanced baseline measures. The aim of the present study was to determine the frequency of unbalanced baseline BMI on school-based randomized controlled trials (RCT) aimed at obesity reduction and to evaluate the analysis strategies. We hypothesized that the adjustment of unbalanced baseline measures may explain the great discrepancy among studies.

methodsThe source of data was the Medline database content from January 1995 until May 2012. Our search strategy combined key words related to school-based interventions with such related to weight and was not limited by language. The participants' ages were restricted to 6-18 years.

resultsWe identified 146 school-based studies on obesity prevention (or overweight or excessive weight change). Of the 146 studies, 36 were retained for the analysis after excluding reviews, feasibility studies, other outcomes, and repeated publications. 13 (35%) of the reviewed studies had statistically significant (p < 0.05) unbalanced measures of BMI at baseline. 11 studies with BMI balanced at baseline adjusted for the baseline BMI, whereas no baseline adjustment was applied to the 5 unbalanced studies.

conclusionAdjustment for the baseline BMI is frequently done in cluster randomized studies, and there is no standardization for this procedure. Thus, procedures that disentangle the effects of group, time and changes in time, such as mixed effects models, should be used as standard methods in school-based studies on the prevention of weight gain.

Indexed as

BiasBody Mass IndexSchoolsHumansPediatric ObesityResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID24993013
PMCPMC5644859
OpenAlexW2073639791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.