Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37185192›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Testing the effectiveness of a mobile approach avoidance intervention and measuring approach biases in an ecological momentary assessment context: study protocol for a randomised-controlled trial.

Matthias Burkard Aulbach, Hannah van Alebeek, Sercan Kahveci, Jens Blechert

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matthias Burkard AulbachDepartment of Psychology, Paris Lodron Universitat Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria matthias.aulbach@plus.ac.at.ORCID 0000-0003-3830-2867
Hannah van AlebeekDepartment of Psychology, Paris Lodron Universitat Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
Sercan KahveciDepartment of Psychology, Paris Lodron Universitat Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
Jens BlechertDepartment of Psychology, Paris Lodron Universitat Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
University of Salzburg · AT

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF KLI 762Austrian Science Fund FWF W 1233
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUnhealthy eating behaviour is a major contributor to obesity and related diseases and is associated with a behavioural bias to approach rather than avoid desired foods, as measured with reaction time tasks. Approach-avoidance interventions (AAIs) have been proposed as a way to modify food evaluations and help people to eat in accordance with their dietary goals. Mobile implementations of AAI might be easily accessible, low threshold interventions, but their effectiveness has not been established yet. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Participants who aim to change their eating behaviour are randomised to intervention or control groups. They complete six sessions of a smartphone-based AAI, in which they push (ie, avoid) or pull (ie, approach) personalised food images. Intervention group participants always avoid foods that they personally want to eat less often and approach foods that they personally want to eat more often. In the control group, images are paired equally often with both response directions. To evaluate contextual and dynamic intervention effects, ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is measured throughout, with questions about food intake, hunger, stress, emotions, eating intentions, food craving and impulsivity twice a day. Additional EMA preintervention and postintervention measures are administered before and after the intervention phase (4 days each) with a 1-day follow-up EMA 4 weeks after the intervention. Multilevel models will examine the temporal covariance between approach bias and self-reported variables as well as short-term and long-term intervention effects on approach bias, food intake and craving. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Salzburg. Results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS, registration number DRKS00030780.

Indexed as

Ecological Momentary AssessmentFeeding BehaviorCravingDietHumansObesityRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicInformation technologyNUTRITION & DIETETICSPREVENTIVE MEDICINEPUBLIC HEALTHWorld Wide Web technology

Identifiers

PMID37185192
PMCPMC10151942
OpenAlexW4366983588

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.