Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34126934›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical research methodology2021

Systematic review and meta analysis of differential attrition between active and control arms in randomized controlled trials of lifestyle interventions in chronic disease.

Bevens W, Shoushtari A, Jelinek P, Jelinek Ga, Weiland Tj

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical research methodology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. The effect of a community-based health behaviour intervention on health-related quality of life in people with Type 2 diabetes in Nepal: a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bevens WCentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. william.bevens@unimelb.edu.au.
Shoushtari ACentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Jelinek PCentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Jelinek GaCentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Weiland TjCentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAttrition is a major obstacle for lifestyle interventions sustained for the medium-to-long term and can have significant consequences on the internal validity of a trial. When the degree of attrition differs between active and control arms this is termed differential attrition and is an important consideration during initial stages of trial planning.

objectivesThe primary research question of this study was: what is the differential attrition between treatment arms in lifestyle interventions for prevalent chronic diseases?

methodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 studies involving a lifestyle intervention component in cohorts with chronic diseases. The search accessed three databases: Scopus, Medline Ovid and Web of Science. Attrition between treatment arms was analysed using a random-effects model and examined the relationship between the relative attrition and potential moderators, such as time to final follow-up, time to first follow-up, type of disease, type of control, type of intervention and length of treatment.

resultsThe pooled risk ratio was 1.00 (95% CI 0.97 - 1.03) and only one study fell outside this range. A univariable association was described between the pooled risk ration and length (years) to final follow-up, which did not remain in the multivariable model.

conclusionsUltimately, we found no evidence of differential attrition in medium-to-long term lifestyle intervention studies for chronic disease, increasing confidence in conducting such studies with minimal potential of attrition bias.

trial registrationPROSPERO registration number CRD42018084495 .

Indexed as

Life StyleBiasChronic DiseaseHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAttritionChronic diseaseLifestyleRetention

Identifiers

PMID34126934
PMCPMC8204467
OpenAlexW3169592708

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.