Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26825583›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2016

Shedding light on research participation effects in behaviour change trials: a qualitative study examining research participant experiences.

Virginia MacNeill, Marian Foley, Alan Quirk, Jim McCambridge

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Virginia MacNeillFaculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK.
Marian FoleyFaculty Health, Psychology and Social Care Manchester Metropolitan University, 799 Wilmslow Road, Manchester, M20 2RR, UK.
Alan QuirkRoyal College of Psychiatrists' Centre for Quality Improvement, 21 Prescot Street, London, E1 8BB, UK.
Jim McCambridgeFaculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK. Jim.McCambridge@york.ac.uk.
Faculty of Public Health · GBManchester Metropolitan University · GBRoyal College of Psychiatrists · GBUniversity of York · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT086516MA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe sequence of events in a behaviour change trial involves interactions between research participants and the trial process. Taking part in such a study has the potential to influence the behaviour of the participant, and if it does, this can engender bias in trial outcomes. Since participants' experience has received scant attention, the aim of this study is thus to generate hypotheses about which aspects of the conduct of behaviour change trials might matter most to participants, and thus have potential to alter subsequent behaviours and bias trial outcomes

methodsTwenty participants were opportunistically screened for a health compromising behaviour (unhealthy diet, lack of exercise, smoking or alcohol consumption) and recruited if eligible. Semi structured face to face interviews were conducted, after going through the usual processes involved in trial recruitment, baseline assessment and randomisation. Participants were given information on the contents of an intervention or control condition in a behaviour change trial, which was not actually implemented. Three months later they returned to reflect on these experiences and whether they had any effect on their behaviour during the intervening period. Data from the latter interview were analysed thematically using a modified grounded theory approach.

resultsThe early processes of trial participation raised awareness of unhealthy behaviours, although most reported having had only fleeting intentions to change their behaviour as a result of taking part in this study, in the absence of interventions. However, careful examination of the accounts revealed evidence of subtle research participation effects, which varied according to the health behaviour, and its perceived social acceptability. Participants' relationships with the research study were viewed as somewhat important in stimulating thinking about whether and how to make lifestyle changes.

conclusionThese participants described no dramatic impacts attributable to taking part in this study. This study demonstrates the likely value of well conducted qualitative studies of subtle research participation effects, which may be particularly important to explore for alcohol. Separating unintended influences in trial participation from the effects of behaviour change interventions being evaluated therein is necessary for valid estimates of intervention effects.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthHealth BehaviorAdultAlcohol DrinkingClinical Trials as TopicDietExerciseFemaleHealth EducationHealth PromotionHumansMalePatient SelectionQualitative ResearchResearch Subjects

Identifiers

PMID26825583
PMCPMC4733277
OpenAlexW2272879107

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.