Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34152270›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2021

Fidelity of Delivery and Contextual Factors Influencing Children's Level of Engagement: Process Evaluation of the Online Remote Behavioral Intervention for Tics Trial.

Kareem Khan, Chris Hollis, Charlotte L Hall, Elizabeth Murray, E Bethan Davies, Per Andrén, David Mataix-Cols, Tara Murphy, Cris Glazebrook

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Digital therapeutics in the clinic.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Kareem KhanDivision of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3836-2827
Chris HollisDivision of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1083-6744
Charlotte L HallDivision of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5412-6165
Elizabeth MurrayResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8932-3695
E Bethan DaviesDivision of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3134-0879
Per AndrénCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-1358-0166
David Mataix-ColsCentre for Psychiatry Research, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm Health Care Services, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-4545-0924
Tara MurphyTic Disorder Clinic, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1759-3562
Cris GlazebrookDivision of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7459-9445
University of Nottingham · GBStockholm County Council · SEGreat Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Online Remote Behavioral Intervention for Tics (ORBIT) study was a multicenter randomized controlled trial of a complex intervention that consisted of a web-based behavioral intervention for children and young people with tic disorders. In the first part of a two-stage process evaluation, we conducted a mixed methods study exploring the reach, dose, and fidelity of the intervention and contextual factors influencing engagement.

objectiveThis study aims to explore the fidelity of delivery and contextual factors underpinning the ORBIT trial.

methodsBaseline study data and intervention usage metrics from participants in the intervention arm were used as quantitative implementation data (N=112). The experiences of being in the intervention were explored through semistructured interviews with children (n=20) and parent participants (n=20), therapists (n=4), and referring clinicians (n=6). A principal component analysis was used to create a comprehensive, composite measure of children and young people's engagement with the intervention. Engagement factor scores reflected relative uptake as assessed by a range of usage indices, including chapters accessed, number of pages visited, and number of log-ins. The engagement factor score was used as the dependent variable in a multiple linear regression analysis with various contextual variables as independent variables to assess if there were any significant predictors of engagement.

resultsThe intervention was implemented with high fidelity, and participants deemed the intervention acceptable and satisfactory. The engagement was high, with child participants completing an average of 7.5 of 10 (SD 2.7) chapters, and 88.4% (99/112) of participants completed the minimum of the first four chapters-the predefined threshold effective dose. Compared with the total population of children with tic disorders, participants in the sample tended to have more educated parents and lived in more economically advantaged areas; however, socioeconomic factors were not related to engagement factor scores. Factors associated with higher engagement factor scores included participants enrolled at the London site versus the Nottingham site (P=.01), self-referred versus clinic referred (P=.04), higher parental engagement as evidenced by the number of parental chapters completed (n=111; ρ=0.73; P<.001), and more therapist time for parents (n=111; ρ=0.46; P<.001). A multiple linear regression indicated that parents' chapter completion (β=.69; t

conclusionsOverall, the intervention had high fidelity of delivery and was evaluated positively by participants, although reach may have been constrained by the nature of the randomized controlled trial. Parental engagement and therapist time for parents were strong predictors of intervention implementation, which has important implications for designing and implementing digital therapeutic interventions in child and adolescent mental health services. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s13063-019-3974-3.

Indexed as

Internet-Based InterventionTic DisordersTicsAdolescentBehavior TherapyChildHumansParentschildren and young peoplechronic tic disordersimplementation fidelitymixed methodsonline behavioral interventionprocess evaluationTourette syndrome

Identifiers

PMID34152270
PMCPMC8277316
OpenAlexW3137693227

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.