Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38615001›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2024

How the Plants for Joints multidisciplinary lifestyle intervention achieved its effects: a mixed methods process evaluation.

Carlijn A Wagenaar, Alie Toonstra, Wendy Walrabenstein, Dirkjan van Schaardenburg, Femke van Nassau

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Carlijn A WagenaarReade Center for Rheumtology and Rehabilitation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. c.a.wagenaar@amsterdamumc.nl.
Alie ToonstraReade Center for Rheumtology and Rehabilitation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Wendy WalrabensteinAmsterdam Rheumatology and Immunology Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Dirkjan van SchaardenburgReade Center for Rheumtology and Rehabilitation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Femke van NassauDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Reade · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMw) 555003210
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPlants for Joints (PFJ) is a multidisciplinary intervention centered around a whole-food plant-based diet, physical activity, and sleep and stress management. The PFJ intervention successfully improved disease activity and symptoms in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or osteoarthritis (OA), respectively, and metabolic health. To investigate how these effects were achieved a mixed methods process evaluation was conducted to understand the context, implementation, and mechanism of impact of the PFJ intervention. Also, the relationship between degree of implementation and lifestyle changes was explored.

methodsQuantitative and qualitative data were collected across the evaluation domains context (i.e. reach), implementation (i.e. recruitment and delivery), and mechanism of impact (i.e. responsiveness) of both the participants and coaches (incl. dietitians, sport coaches) according to the UK MRC guidelines for process evaluations. Data was collected from the participants via focus groups and questionnaires after the intervention, and interviews with coaches. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically, and quantitative data were assessed with descriptive statistics and linear regression analyses. Degree of implementation was quantified using a theory-driven implementation index score composed of different process evaluation constructs.

resultsOf the 155 participants who participated in the PFJ intervention, 106 (68%) took part in the questionnaire and 34 (22%) attended a focus group. Participants felt the intervention was complete, coherent, and would recommend the intervention to others (mean score 9.2 (SD 1.4) out of 10). Participants felt heard and empowered to take control of their lifestyle and health outcomes. Components perceived as most useful were self-monitoring, social support, practical and theoretical information, and (individual) guidance by the multidisciplinary team. Participants perceived the intervention as feasible, and many indicated it effectively improved their health outcomes. In an explorative analysis there was no significant difference in healthy lifestyle changes across implementation index score groups.

conclusionThis process evaluation offers important insights into why the PFJ intervention works and how the intervention can be optimized for future implementation. Results indicating the intervention's high satisfaction, feasibility, and perceived effectiveness, further support the use of plant-based lifestyle interventions as an additional treatment option for patients with RA, OA, or other chronic diseases.

trial registrationInternational Clinical Trial Registry Platform numbers: NL7800, NL7801, and NL7802, all registered 17-06-2019.

Indexed as

Life StyleOsteoarthritisData AccuracyEmotionsExerciseHealthy LifestyleHumansLifestyle interventionOsteoarthritisProcess evaluationRheumatoid arthritis

Identifiers

PMID38615001
PMCPMC11016213
OpenAlexW4394783469

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.