Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29107994›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Moderators of wellbeing interventions: Why do some people respond more positively than others?

R Adele H Wang, S Katherine Nelson-Coffey, Kristin Layous, Katherine Jacobs Bao, Oliver S P Davis, Claire M A Haworth

Abstract readTwin Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors.

R Adele H WangSchool of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7961-8027
S Katherine Nelson-CoffeyDepartment of Psychology, Sewanee: The University of the South, Sewanee, Tennessee, United States of America.
Kristin LayousDepartment of Psychology, California State University, East Bay, Hayward, California, United States of America.
Katherine Jacobs BaoDepartment of Psychology, Manhattanville College, Purchase, New York, United States of America.
Oliver S P DavisMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Claire M A HaworthSchool of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Funding

Colorado Adoption/Twin Study of Lifespan behavioral development & cognitive aging (CATSLife2)R01AG046938 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO · PI REYNOLDS, CHANDRA A, WADSWORTH, SALLY J · 2015 to 2024
$18.5M
Genetics, School environments and cognitive developmentR01HD044454 · NICHD · KING'S COLLEGE LONDON · PI PLOMIN, ROBERT · 2005 to 2014
$3.4M
Medical Research Council G0901245Medical Research Council MC_UU_12013/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_12013/6Medical Research Council MR/M021475/1NIA NIH HHS R01 AG046938NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD044454
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interventions rarely have a universal effect on all individuals. Reasons ranging from participant characteristics, context and fidelity of intervention completion could cause some people to respond more positively than others. Understanding these individual differences in intervention response may provide clues to the mechanisms behind the intervention, as well as inform future designs to make interventions maximally beneficial for all. Here we focus on an intervention designed to improve adolescent wellbeing, and explore potential moderators using a representative and well-powered sample. 16-year old participants (N = 932) in the Twins Wellbeing Intervention Study logged online once a week to complete control and wellbeing-enhancing activities consecutively. Throughout the study participants also provided information about a range of potential moderators of intervention response including demographics, seasonality, personality, baseline characteristics, activity fit, and effort. As expected, some individuals gained more from the intervention than others; we used multi-level modelling to test for moderation effects that could explain these individual differences. Of the 15 moderators tested, none significantly explained individual differences in intervention response in the intervention and follow-up phases. Self-reported effort and baseline positive affect had a notable effect in moderating response in the control phase, during which there was no overall improvement in wellbeing and mental health. Our results did not replicate the moderation effects that have been suggested by previous literature and future work needs to reconcile these differences. They also show that factors that have previously been shown to influence baseline wellbeing do not also influence an individual's ability to benefit from a wellbeing intervention. Although future research should continue to explore potential moderators of intervention efficacy, our results suggest that the beneficial effect of positive activities in adolescents were universal across such factors as sex and socioeconomic status, bolstering claims of the scalability of positive activities to increase adolescent wellbeing.

Indexed as

Mental HealthAdolescentFemaleHumansMaleModels, PsychologicalSocial Class

Identifiers

PMID29107994
PMCPMC5673222

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.