Dataset Information

Is there sufficient evidence regarding signage-based stair use interventions? A sequential meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:The proliferation of studies using motivational signs to promote stair use continues unabated, with their oft-cited potential for increasing population-level physical activity participation. This study examined all stair use promotional signage studies since 1980, calculating pre-estimates and post-estimates of stair use. The aim of this project was to conduct a sequential meta-analysis to pool intervention effects, in order to determine when the evidence base was sufficient for population-wide dissemination. DESIGN:Using comparable data from 50 stair-promoting studies (57 unique estimates) we pooled data to assess the effect sizes of such interventions. RESULTS:At baseline, median stair usage across interventions was 8.1%, with an absolute median increase of 2.2% in stair use following signage-based interventions. The overall pooled OR indicated that participants were 52% more likely to use stairs after exposure to promotional signs (adjusted OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.70). Incremental (sequential) meta-analyses using z-score methods identified that sufficient evidence for stair use interventions has existed since 2006, with recent studies providing no further evidence on the effect sizes of such interventions. CONCLUSIONS:This analysis has important policy and practice implications. Researchers continue to publish stair use interventions without connection to policymakers' needs, and few stair use interventions are implemented at a population level. Researchers should move away from repeating short-term, small-scale, stair sign interventions, to investigating their scalability, adoption and fidelity. Only such research translation efforts will provide sufficient evidence of external validity to inform their scaling up to influence population physical activity.

SUBMITTER: Bauman A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5719260 | biostudies-other | 2017 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is there sufficient evidence regarding signage-based stair use interventions? A sequential meta-analysis.

Bauman Adrian A Milton Karen K Kariuki Maina M Fedel Karla K Lewicka Mary M

BMJ open 20171128 11

<h4>Objective</h4>The proliferation of studies using motivational signs to promote stair use continues unabated, with their oft-cited potential for increasing population-level physical activity participation. This study examined all stair use promotional signage studies since 1980, calculating pre-estimates and post-estimates of stair use. The aim of this project was to conduct a sequential meta-analysis to pool intervention effects, in order to determine when the evidence base was sufficient fo ...[more]

PMID: 29183924

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCommunity-based organizations (CBOs) are critical partners in delivering evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to address cancer inequities. However, CBO practitioners do not typically have access to opportunities to build the necessary capacity (skills, knowledge, motivation, and resources) for using EBIs. Although capacity-building interventions can offer a solution, inconsistent definitions and measurements of capacity limit the ability to develop and evaluate such efforts. We explored how and why conceptualizations of core skills for EBI use differ between practitioners and academics addressing cancer and other health inequities. We anchored the inquiry with a commonly used set of target skills for EBI capacity-building efforts.MethodsThe study was conducted by an interdisciplinary team of academic researchers and CBO practitioners. We gathered data through semi-structured, hour-long interviews with practitioners and academics working to address cancer and other health inequities (n = 19). After hearing a brief vignette about a CBO addressing cervical cancer inequities, participants considered a widely accepted list of skills for EBI use that included assessing needs, engaging stakeholders, and selecting, adapting, implementing, evaluating, and sustaining the EBI. We used a team-based, reflexive thematic analysis approach grounded in critical and constructivist perspectives.ResultsOverall, the original list resonated with practitioners and academics and they added new skills to the list (cultural humility and systems change). Practitioners' responses described skills from the reference point of addressing broader community needs and context and achieving change over the long term, emphasizing aspects of health promotion in their descriptions. Academics offered a mix of perspectives, with some focused on addressing community needs (and related flexibility regarding EBIs) but more emphasized skills needed to deliver a specific EBI to achieve a focused set of health and equity outcomes.ConclusionsThere is a significant opportunity to leverage complementary expertise and perspectives held by practitioners and academics addressing cancer inequities. However, the different frames utilized suggest proactive efforts will be required to find alignment across groups, particularly in valuing diverse contributions and identifying relevant outcomes of interest for each group. Such alignment is critical to designing effective capacity-building interventions and supporting the routine utilization of EBIs to address cancer inequities.

Project description:Rates of cannabis use are highest during emerging adulthood (age 18-25), with the prevalence of near daily and daily increasing among this age group. Emerging adults are clinically challenging in terms of harmful cannabis use due to perceptions of high rates of peer use, social acceptance, and low risk of harm. Brief interventions to increase awareness and promote motivation to change are therefore particularly important for this age group. There is existing evidence on the effectiveness of brief interventions for alcohol in emerging adults, but it is not clear if comparable evidence is present for cannabis. The objective of this systematic review is to summarize and critically appraise the existing literature of brief interventions for cannabis use both narratively, to describe the content and delivery of existing interventions, and meta-analytically, to determine the aggregated efficacy of these interventions on cannabis use and other outcomes (e.g., other substance use, mental health, help-seeking behaviors, and academic and occupational outcomes).A systematic search of randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental trials, and pre-post designs will be conducted in the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Allied and Complementary Medicine, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO. Ongoing trials will be identified using the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov , and Current Controlled Trials. Unpublished trials will be identified using Proquest Dissertations, OpenGrey, Google Scholar, and brief interventions on the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration webpage. Two authors will independently screen and extract data from articles using a predetermined screening and extraction forms (which will include risk of bias assessments). Calibration exercises will be performed prior to full screening and extraction. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion or consultation with a third reviewer. All studies will be reported narratively, and if appropriate, we will perform random effects meta-analyses with subgroup analyses and meta-regression.Results of this review are expected to provide guidance on the content, delivery methods, and effectiveness of brief interventions for cannabis use to assist post-secondary institutions in identifying brief intervention strategies to implement prior to or in response to legalization.CRD42018085412.

Project description:BackgroundHealth authorities recommend educating diabetic patients and their families and initiating measures aimed at improving self-management, promoting a positive behavior change, and reducing the risk of complications. Social media could provide valid channel to intervene in and deliver diabetes education. However, it is not well known whether the use of these channels in such interventions can help improve the patients' outcomes.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to review and describe the current existing evidence on the use of social media in interventions targeting people affected with diabetes.MethodsA search was conducted across 4 databases (PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library).The quality of the evidence of the included primary studies was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria, and the risk of bias of systematic reviews was assessed by drawing on AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) guidelines. The outcomes reported by these studies were extracted and analyzed.ResultsWe included 20 moderate- and high-quality studies in the review: 17 primary studies and 3 systematic reviews. Of the 16 publications evaluating the effect on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) of the interventions using social media, 13 reported significant reductions in HbA1c values. The 5 studies that measured satisfaction with the interventions using social media found positive effects. We found mixed evidence regarding the effect of interventions using social media on health-related quality of life (2 publications found positive effects and 3 found no differences) and on diabetes knowledge or empowerment (2 studies reported improvements and 2 reported no significant changes).ConclusionsThere is very little good-quality evidence on the use of social media in interventions aimed at helping people with diabetes. However, the use of these channels is mostly linked to benefits on patients' outcomes. Public health institutions, clinicians, and other stakeholders who aim at improving the knowledge of diabetic patients could consider the use of social media in their interventions.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The aim of present study is to quantitatively evaluate the association between different interventions and abstinence rates based on network meta-analysis. METHOD:Following PRISMA guidelines, randomized clinical trials that compared different alcoholic interventions for alcohol use disorders associated with abstinence rates in treatment sessions or/and follow-up sessions were recruited. Main data synthesis was performed by Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses, and the relative ranking of interventions was estimated by cumulative probability P values (SUCRA). Funnel plot symmetry was used to detect publication bias. Moreover, pair-wised comparison was also conducted to determine the statistical difference and forest plots were generated to calculate the differences between the groups. The Grades of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria were utilized for the recommendations of evidence from pairwise direct comparisons. RESULTS:A total of 137 RCTs containing 27,282 participants and 8 variations of psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, contingency management, and brief intervention used as treatment interventions were included. In summary, contingency management plus psychotherapy was demonstrated to be effective and possessed the best rank of achieving the highest abstinence rate in treatment sessions (SUCRA, 0.61). Pharmacotherapy plus psychotherapy also revealed its efficacy and was associated with the highest abstinence rate in follow-up sessions (SUCRA, 0.40). More importantly, psychotherapy alone was demonstrated not to be associated with higher abstinence rates in both treatment (OR, 1.052; 95% CI, 0.907-1.220) and follow-up sessions (OR, 0.967; 95% CI, 0.552-1.693), yet pharmacotherapy seemed to be the only intervention associated with higher abstinence rates compared to controls in both sessions (treatment session: OR, 1.074; 95% CI, 1.002-1.152) (follow-up session: OR, 1.442; 95% CI, 1.094-1.900). CONCLUSIONS:Contingency management plus psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy plus psychotherapy were demonstrated to be associated with the highest abstinence rates in treatment sessions and follow-up sessions, respectively. However, contingency management and pharmacotherapy seemed to be the substantial crucial factors allowing for the maintenance of the highest abstinence rates in respective sessions, although we need more evidence for further validation.

Project description:BackgroundCognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) has long-standing evidence for efficacy in the treatment of alcohol use, yet implementation in clinical practice has been challenging. Delivery of CBT through technology-based platforms, such as web-based programs and mobile applications, has the potential to provide widespread access to this evidence-based intervention. While there have been reviews indicating the efficacy of technology-based delivery of CBT for various psychiatric conditions, none have focused on efficacy for alcohol use. The current meta-analysis was conducted to fill this research gap.MethodsDescriptive data were used to characterize the nature of the literature on technology-delivered, CBT-based interventions for alcohol use ("CBT Tech"). Inverse-variance-weighted effect sizes were calculated, and random effects, effect sizes were pooled in 4 subgroups.ResultsFifteen published trials conducted primarily with at-risk or heavy drinkers were identified. Of these studies, 60% explicitly targeted alcohol use moderation. The content of CBT Tech programs varied, ranging from 4 to 62 sessions/exercises, with many programs combining elements of motivational interviewing (47%). With respect to efficacy, CBT Tech as a stand-alone treatment in contrast to a minimal treatment control showed a positive and statistically significant, albeit small effect (g = 0.20: 95% CI = 0.22, 0.38, kes = 5). When CBT Tech was compared to treatment as usual (TAU), effects were nonsignificant. However, when CBT Tech was tested as an addition to TAU, in contrast to TAU only, the effect size was positive, significant (g = 0.30: 95% CI = 0.10, 0.50, kes = 7), and stable over 12-month follow-up. Only 2 studies compared CBT Tech to in-person CBT, and this pooled effect size did not suggest superior efficacy.ConclusionsThese results show a benefit for technology-delivered, CBT-based interventions as a stand-alone therapy for heavy drinking or as an addition to usual care in specialty substance use settings.

Dataset Information

Is there sufficient evidence regarding signage-based stair use interventions? A sequential meta-analysis.

Publications

Is there sufficient evidence regarding signage-based stair use interventions? A sequential meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets