Dataset Information

Quantifying the Difference between Active and Passive Control Groups in Cognitive Interventions Using two Meta-Analytical Approaches.

ABSTRACT: Despite promising reports of broad cognitive benefit in studies of cognitive training, it has been argued that the reliance of many studies on no-intervention control groups (passive controls) make these reports difficult to interpret because placebo effects cannot be ruled out. Although researchers have recently been trying to incorporate more active controls, in which participants engage in an alternate intervention, previous work has been contentious as to whether this actually yields meaningfully different results. To better understand the influence of passive and active control groups on cognitive interventions, we conducted two meta-analyses to estimate their relative effect sizes. While the first one broadly surveyed the literature by compiling data from 34 meta-analyses, the second one synthesized data from 42 empirical studies that simultaneously employed both types of controls. Both analyses showed no meaningful performance difference between passive and active controls, suggesting that current active control placebo paradigms might not be appropriately designed to reliably capture these non-specific effects or that these effects are minimal in this literature.

SUBMITTER: Au J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8320766 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn Afghanistan, improving TB case detection remains challenging. In 2014, only half of the estimated incident TB cases were notified, and notifications have decreased since peaking in 2007. Active case finding has been increasingly considered to improve TB case notifications. While access to health services has improved in Afghanistan, it remains poor and many people seeking health services won't receive proper care.MethodsFrom October 2011 through December 2012 we conducted three separate case finding strategies in six provinces of Afghanistan and measured impact on TB case notification. Systematically screening cough among attendees at 47 health facilities, active household contact investigation of smear-positive index TB patients, and active screening at 15 camps for internally displaced people were conducted. We collected both intervention yield and official quarterly notification data. Additional TB notifications were calculated by comparing numbers of cases notified during the intervention with those notified before the intervention, then adjusting for secular trends in notification.ResultsWe screened 2,022,127 people for TB symptoms during the intervention, tested 59,838 with smear microscopy and detected 5,046 people with smear-positive TB. Most cases (81.7%, 4,125) were identified in health facilities while nearly 20% were found through active case finding. A 56% increase in smear-positive TB notifications was observed between the baseline and intervention periods among the 47 health facilities, where cases detected by all three strategies were notified.DiscussionWhile most people with TB are likely to be identified through health facility screening, there are many people who remain without a proper diagnosis if outreach is not attempted. This is especially true in places like Afghanistan where access to general services is poor. Targeted active case finding can improve the number of people who are detected and treated for TB and can push towards the targets of the Stop TB Global Plan and End TB Strategy.

Dataset Information

Quantifying the Difference between Active and Passive Control Groups in Cognitive Interventions Using two Meta-Analytical Approaches.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets