Billets de Michelle Dawson

Billet publié sur Twitter/X le 17/12/2013 22:50

Twitter/X Publication avec DOI crossref Page web post_metadata Lien intégré au billet

Liens cités structurés

2 ressources citées

Publication avec DOI Récupéré Publication crossref

John A Cunningham, Kypros Kypri, Jim McCambridge (2013). Exploratory randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of a waiting list control design. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13(1), 150-150. Springer Science and Business Media LLC.

Publication date
06/12/2013
Identifiant
10.1186/1471-2288-13-150
Auteurs
John A Cunningham, Kypros Kypri, Jim McCambridge
Source
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Détails
13(1), 150-150
Type de référence
article
Éditeur
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Source de métadonnées
crossref

Résumé

BACKGROUND: Employing waiting list control designs in psychological and behavioral intervention research may artificially inflate intervention effect estimates. This exploratory randomized controlled trial tested this proposition in a study employing a brief intervention for problem drinkers, one domain of research in which waiting list control designs are used. METHODS: All participants (N = 185) were provided with brief personalized feedback intervention materials after being randomly allocated either to be told that they were in the intervention condition and that this was the intervention or to be told that they were in the waiting list control condition and that they would receive access to the intervention in four weeks with this information provided in the meantime. RESULTS: A total of 157 participants (85%) were followed-up after 4 weeks. Between-group differences were found in one of four outcomes (proportion within safe drinking guidelines). An interaction was identified between experimental manipulation and stage of change at study entry such that participant change was arrested among those more ready to change and told they were on the waiting list. CONCLUSIONS: Trials with waiting list control conditions may overestimate treatment effects, though the extent of any such bias appears likely to vary between study populations. Arguably they should only be used where this threat to valid inference has been carefully assessed.

Auteur·ices de l’étude dans cette référence citée

Page web Incomplet Publication post_metadata

(n.d.). http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2013/12/17/waiting-list/

Source de métadonnées
post_metadata

Résumé

Aucun résumé n’est disponible dans les métadonnées récupérées.