Screen Time Weight-loss Intervention Targeting Children at Home (SWITCH): process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial intervention
Foley L, Ni Mhurchu C, Marsh S, Epstein LH, Olds T, Dewes O, Heke I, Jiang Y, Maddison R
BMC public health · 7 citas
Etiquetas de revisión
Vínculos de autores con la industriaDatos neutrales que nuestra revisión registró sobre cómo se hizo este estudio. Describen el método, nunca si nos gusta el resultado.
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Ensayo controlado aleatorizado (indexado por PubMed)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Marcadores de salud y funcionamiento
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación independiente
- Organización sin fines de lucro
- Wellcome Trust
- Gobierno
- United Kingdom Clinical Research Collaboration
- Organización sin fines de lucro
- Cancer Research UK
- Gobierno
- National Institute for Health and Care Research
- Organización sin fines de lucro
- British Heart Foundation
- Organización sin fines de lucro
- National Heart Foundation of New Zealand
- Universidad u hospital
- Centre for Diet and Activity Research
- Gobierno
- Medical Research Council
- Gobierno
- Economic and Social Research Council
- Gobierno
- Health Research Council of New Zealand
- Gobierno
- National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
- Autores
- Al menos un autor declara un vínculo económico con la industria
- Subvenciones
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007462/1); Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007462/1); Economic and Social Research Council (MR/K023187/1); National Institute for Health and Care Research (MR/K023187/1); Cancer Research UK (MR/K023187/1); Wellcome Trust (MR/K023187/1); Medical Research Council (MR/K023187/1); Wellcome Trust (087636/Z/08/Z); British Heart Foundation (MR/K023187/1); Health Research Council of New Zealand (10/077); Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12015/6); Medical Research Council (MR/K023187/1)
Según 11 financiadores declarados y la declaración de financiación del texto completo.
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2016-05-26 · BMC Public Health · vol. 16 · número 1 · pág. 439
- Editorial
- BioMed Central
- Citado
- 11 citas · más que el 79% de estudios similares · 1.1× el promedio de su campo
- Referencias
- 19 trabajos
- Acceso
- Acceso abierto (revista) · CC-BY
- Áreas de investigación
- Physical Activity and Health · Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet · Health Policy Implementation Science
- Palabras clave
- screen time, sedentary behavior, overweight children, family intervention, home-based intervention, community workers, intervention uptake, intervention delivery, primary caregivers, childhood obesity, body composition, negative results
- MeSH
- humans, treatment outcome, health behavior, family, body composition, video games, television, child, child health services, new zealand, female, male, patient education as topic, pediatric obesity, process assessment, health care
9 autores
- Louise S. Foley🇳🇿🇬🇧 · autor de correspondenciaUniversity of Auckland; University of Cambridge; MRC Epidemiology Unit; Communicating Diet and Activity Research
- Cliona Ní Mhurchú🇳🇿University of Auckland
- Samantha Marsh🇳🇿University of Auckland
- Leonard H. Epstein🇺🇸University at Buffalo, State University of New York
- Tim Olds🇦🇺University of South Australia
- Ofa Dewes🇳🇿University of Auckland
- Ihirangi Heke
- Yannan Jiang🇳🇿University of Auckland
- Ralph Maddison🇳🇿University of Auckland
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Background
The Screen Time Weight-loss Intervention Targeting Children at Home (SWITCH) trial tested a family intervention to reduce screen-based sedentary behaviour in overweight children. The trial found no significant effect of the intervention on children's screen-based sedentary behaviour. To explore these null findings, we conducted a pre-planned process evaluation, focussing on intervention delivery and uptake.
Methods
SWITCH was a randomised controlled trial of a 6-month family intervention to reduce screen time in overweight children aged 9-12 years (n = 251). Community workers met with each child's primary caregiver to deliver the intervention content. Community workers underwent standard training and were monitored once by a member of the research team to assess intervention delivery. The primary caregiver implemented the intervention with their child, and self-reported intervention use at 3 and 6 months. An exploratory analysis determined whether child outcomes at 6 months varied by primary caregiver use of the intervention.
Results
Monitoring indicated that community workers delivered all core intervention components to primary caregivers. However, two thirds of primary caregivers reported using any intervention component "sometimes" or less frequently at both time points, suggesting that intervention uptake was poor. Additionally, analyses indicated no effect of primary caregiver intervention use on child outcomes at 6 months, suggesting the intervention itself lacked efficacy.
Conclusions
Poor uptake, and the efficacy of the intervention itself, may have played a role in the null findings of the SWITCH trial on health behaviour and body composition.
Trial registration
The trial was registered in the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (no. ACTRN12611000164998 ); registration date: 10/02/2011.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial (CC BY).
Confianza de la comunidad
Cargando…
¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?
Comentarios
¿Algo está mal aquí?
Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.
Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.