Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34544482›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2021

Understanding the effectiveness and underlying mechanisms of lifestyle modification interventions in adults with learning disabilities: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review.

Dikshyanta Rana, Sophie Westrop, Evi Germeni, Arlene McGarty, Louisa Ells, Phillippa Lally, Michael McEwan, Craig Melville, Leanne Harris, Olivia Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

10 authors.

Dikshyanta RanaInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK. dikshyanta.rana@glasgow.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-9133-3094
Sophie WestropInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK.
Evi GermeniInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK.
Arlene McGartyInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK.
Louisa EllsSchool of Clinical and Applied Sciences, Leeds Beckett University, City Campus, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK.
Phillippa LallyUCL Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
Michael McEwanPeople First (Scotland), Edinburgh, EH7 5PW, UK.
Craig MelvilleInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK.
Leanne HarrisSchool of Medicine, Dentistry & Nursing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G31 2ER, UK.
Olivia WuInstitute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK.

Funding

Department of Health NIHR 128755
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdults with learning disabilities have an increased disposition to unhealthy lifestyle behaviours which often occur simultaneously. Existing studies focus on complex interventions targeting unhealthy diet, physical inactivity, sedentary behaviour, smoking, and alcohol use to reduce health risks experienced. It is essential to understand how well these interventions work, what works, for whom, in what context and why. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness and underlying mechanisms of lifestyle modification interventions for adults with learning disabilities.

methodsThis is a mixed-methods systematic review consisting of a network meta-analysis (NMA) and realist synthesis. Electronic databases (ASSIA, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO) will be searched from inception to 14 January 2021 with no language restriction. Additionally, trial registries, grey literature databases and references lists will be searched. Studies related to lifestyle modification interventions on the adult population (>18 years) with learning disabilities will be eligible for inclusion. Two independent researchers will screen studies, extract data and assess its quality and risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (RoB Version 2) and ROBINS-I. The strength of the body of evidence will be assessed based on the GRADE approach. The NMA will incorporate results from RCTs and quasi-experimental studies to estimate the effectiveness of various lifestyle interventions. Where appropriate, a component NMA (CNMA) will be used to estimate effectiveness. The realist synthesis will complement and explain the findings of NMA and CNMA by including additional qualitative and mixed-methods studies. Studies will be included based on their relevance to the programme theory and the rigour of their methods, as determined by quality appraisal tools appropriate to the study design. Results from both syntheses will be incorporated into a logic model. DISCUSSION: The paucity of population-specific lifestyle interventions contributes to the challenges of behaviour change in adults with learning disabilities. This study will provide an evidence-base from which various stakeholders can develop effective interventions for adults with learning disabilities. The evidence will also help prioritise and inform research recommendations for future primary research so that people with learning disabilities live happier, healthier and longer lives.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD 42020223290.

Indexed as

Behavior TherapyLearning DisabilitiesAdultDietHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicSedentary BehaviorSmokingComponent network meta-analysisIntellectual disabilityLearning disabilityLifestyle interventionsLogic modelNetwork meta-analysisRealist reviewSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34544482
PMCPMC8453997

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.