Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32638346›Full record

ReviewCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique2020

Methodological approaches to the design and analysis of nonrandomized intervention studies for the prevention of child and adolescent obesity.

Ravinder Sandhu, Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Jean-Eric Tarride, Vanessa De Rubeis, Sarah Carsley, Laura N Anderson

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ravinder SandhuDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, CRL-221, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Lawrence MbuagbawDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, CRL-221, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Jean-Eric TarrideDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, CRL-221, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Vanessa De RubeisDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, CRL-221, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Sarah CarsleyDepartment of Health Promotion, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention, Public Health Ontario, 480 University Ave #300, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Laura N AndersonDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, CRL-221, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada. ln.anderson@mcmaster.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-6106-5073
Impact · CAMcMaster University Medical Centre · CAPublic Health Ontario · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesInterventions for child obesity prevention are needed and it is unclear whether evidence from nonrandomized intervention studies is adequate. The objective of this research was to review the methods for the design, analysis and reporting of nonrandomized intervention studies for child obesity prevention and to assess potential for bias.

methodsWe conducted a review of nonrandomized intervention studies, including population health interventions, quasi-experimental studies and natural experiments, published from 2013 to 2017 that were identified in a recent systematic review. Data on study design, intervention and control groups, outcome measures, and statistical analyses, were extracted. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool.

resultsAll identified studies (n = 23) included a school or community-based intervention and had a concurrent control group. Participants were 3-18 years and sample sizes were 100 to > 1 million. Study designs were described inconsistently, and interventions ranged from 14 weeks to 5 years. Obesity was compared between control and intervention groups using logistic or linear regression, analysis of variance and mixed effects regression. Only 48% of studies accounted for clustering, and methods to control for confounding and repeated measures varied substantially. Overall risk of bias was moderate to serious for all studies.

conclusionThere are substantial opportunities to improve the methods for nonrandomized intervention studies and reduce bias. Future studies should use advanced statistical and causal epidemiology methods, including better control for confounding and clustering, to generate higher quality evidence and certainty regarding which obesity prevention interventions are effective.

Indexed as

Research DesignAdolescentBiasChildHumansNon-Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicPediatric ObesityChild obesityInterventionMethodologyNonrandomizedReporting standards

Identifiers

PMID32638346
PMCPMC7352029
OpenAlexW3042017416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.