scholarly journals A cluster randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the daily mile on childhood obesity and wellbeing; the Birmingham daily mile protocol

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie Breheny ◽  
Peymane Adab ◽  
Sandra Passmore ◽  
James Martin ◽  
Emma Lancashire ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Childhood Obesity ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Cluster-randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an obesity prevention programme for Chinese primary school-aged children: the CHIRPY DRAGON study protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. e018415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bai Li ◽  
Wei Jia Liu ◽  
Peymane Adab ◽  
Miranda Pallan ◽  
Karla Hemming ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Childhood Obesity ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Obesity Prevention ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Z Score ◽  
Usual Practice ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionChildhood obesity in China has increased more rapidly and over a shorter time period than in other countries. However, there is a paucity of rigorously developed and evaluated prevention interventions. We aim to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness as well as the implementation process of a complex multicomponent intervention developed using the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) framework. This study provides one of the first examples of rigorous development and evaluation of a childhood obesity prevention programme in a non-western population using the MRC methods.Methods and analysisA cluster-randomised controlled trial in 40 primary schools in Guangzhou, China, including children aged 6–7 years at baseline. Schools will be randomly allocated to either the usual practice (n=20) or intervention arm (n=20). The 12-month intervention consists of four components targeting diet and physical activity behaviours in and outside school, with family involvement. The primary objective is to compare the difference in mean body mass index (BMI) z-score between the intervention and control arms at the end of the intervention (starting March/April 2017). A sample size of 1640 pupils recruited from 40 schools is sufficient to detect a difference of 0.17 units in the mean BMI z-score with a power of 80% (ICC=0.01. ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient) and a significance level of 5%. Treatment effects will be tested using a mixed linear model in STATA adjusting for the child baseline BMI z-score and clustering by school. All analyses will be by intention to treat. Secondary analyses will additionally adjust for prespecified school-level and child-level covariates. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the intervention versus usual practice will be ‘cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY)’. Cost per change in BMI z-score will also be assessed. A range of methods will be used to evaluate intervention implementation, mechanisms of impact and contextual factors.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the Life and Health Sciences Ethical Review Committee at the University of Birmingham and the Ethical Committee of Guangzhou Centre for Disease Control and Prevention. The primary, secondary, process evaluation and economic evaluation results of the trial will be disseminated through relevant international peer-reviewed journals and conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN11867516; Pre-results.

scholarly journals Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PLAN-A intervention, a peer led physical activity program for adolescent girls: results of a cluster randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell Jago ◽  
Byron Tibbitts ◽  
Kathryn Willis ◽  
Emily Sanderson ◽  
Rebecca Kandiyali ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Physical activity is associated with improved health. Girls are less active than boys. Pilot work showed that a peer-led physical activity intervention called PLAN-A was a promising method of increasing physical activity in secondary school age girls. This study examined the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the PLAN-A intervention. Methods We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial with Year 9 (13–14 year old) girls recruited from 20 secondary schools. Schools were randomly assigned to the PLAN-A intervention or a non-intervention control group after baseline data collection. Girls nominated students to be peer leaders. The top 18 % of girls nominated by their peers in intervention schools received three days of training designed to prepare them to support physical activity. Data were collected at two time points, baseline (T0) and 5–6 months post-intervention (T1). Participants wore an accelerometer for seven days to assess the primary outcome of mean weekday minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Multivariable mixed effects linear regression was used to estimate differences in the primary outcome between the two arms on an Intention-to-Treat (ITT) basis. Resource use and quality of life were measured and a within trial economic evaluation from a public sector perspective was conducted. Results A total of 1558 girls were recruited to the study. At T0, girls in both arms engaged in an average of 51 min of MVPA per weekday. The adjusted mean difference in weekday MVPA at T1 was − 2.84 min per day (95 % CI = -5.94 to 0.25) indicating a slightly larger decline in weekday MVPA in the intervention group. Results were broadly consistent when repeated using a multiple imputation approach and for pre-specified secondary outcomes and sub-groups. The mean cost of the PLAN-A intervention was £2817 per school, equivalent to £31 per girl. Economic analyses indicated that PLAN-A did not lead to demonstrable cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per unit change in QALY. Conclusions This study has shown that the PLAN-A intervention did not result in higher levels of weekday MVPA or associated secondary outcomes among Year 9 girls. The PLAN-A intervention should not be disseminated as a public health strategy. Trial registration ISRCTN14539759–31 May, 2018.

scholarly journals School-based intervention study examining approaches for well-being and mental health literacy of pupils in Year 9 in England: study protocol for a multischool, parallel group cluster randomised controlled trial (AWARE)

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e029044 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Hayes ◽  
Anna Moore ◽  
Emily Stapley ◽  
Neil Humphrey ◽  
Rosie Mansfield ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Implementation Evaluation ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionThe prevalence of emotional difficulties in young people is increasing. This upward trend is largely accounted for by escalating symptoms of anxiety and depression. As part of a public health response, there is increasing emphasis on universal prevention programmes delivered in school settings. This protocol describes a three-arm, parallel group cluster randomised controlled trial, investigating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two interventions, alongside a process and implementation evaluation, to improve mental health and well-being of Year 9 pupils in English secondary schools.MethodA three-arm, parallel group cluster randomised controlled trial comparing two different interventions, the Youth Aware of Mental Health (YAM) or the Mental Health and High School Curriculum Guide (The Guide), to Usual Provision. Overall, 144 secondary schools in England will be recruited, involving 8600 Year 9 pupils. The primary outcome for YAM is depressive symptoms, and for The Guide it is intended help-seeking. These will be measured at baseline, 3–6 months and 9–12 months after the intervention commenced. Secondary outcomes measured concurrently include changes to: positive well-being, behavioural difficulties, support from school staff, stigma-related knowledge, attitudes and behaviours, and mental health first aid. An economic evaluation will assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions, and a process and implementation evaluation (including a qualitative research component) will explore several aspects of implementation (fidelity, quality, dosage, reach, participant responsiveness, adaptations), social validity (acceptability, feasibility, utility), and their moderating effects on the outcomes of interest, and perceived impact.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has been approved by the University College London Research Ethics Committee. Findings will be published in a report to the Department for Education, in peer-reviewed journals and at conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN17631228.ProtocolV1 3 January 2019. Substantial changes to the protocol will be communicated to the trials manager to relevant parties (eg, ISRCTN).

scholarly journals Promoting mental health and wellbeing in schools: examining Mindfulness, Relaxation and Strategies for Safety and Wellbeing in English primary and secondary schools: study protocol for a multi-school, cluster randomised controlled trial (INSPIRE)

Trials ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Hayes ◽  
Anna Moore ◽  
Emily Stapley ◽  
Neil Humphrey ◽  
Rosie Mansfield ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Secondary Schools ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Implementation Evaluation ◽  
School Based ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background There are increasing rates of internalising difficulties, particularly anxiety and depression, being reported in children and young people in England. School-based, universal prevention programmes are thought to be one way of helping tackle such difficulties. This protocol describes a four-arm cluster randomised controlled trial, investigating the effectiveness of three different interventions when compared to usual provision, in English primary and secondary pupils. The primary outcome for Mindfulness and Relaxation interventions is a measure of internalising difficulties, while Strategies for Safety and Wellbeing will be examined in relation to intended help-seeking. In addition to the effectiveness analysis, a process and implementation evaluation and a cost-effectiveness evaluation will be undertaken. Methods and analysis Overall, 160 primary schools and 64 secondary schools will be recruited across England. This corresponds to 17,600 participants. Measures will be collected online at baseline, 3–6 months later, and 9–12 months after the commencement of the intervention. An economic evaluation will assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Moreover, a process and implementation evaluation (including a qualitative research component) will explore several aspects of implementation (fidelity, quality, dosage, reach, participant responsiveness, adaptations), social validity (acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility), and their moderating effects on the outcomes of interest, and perceived impact. Discussion This trial aims to address important questions about whether schools’ practices around the promotion of mental wellbeing and the prevention of mental health problems can: (1) be formalised into feasible and effective models of school-based support and (2) whether these practices and their effects can be sustained over time. Given the focus of these interventions on mirroring popular practice in schools and on prioritising approaches that present low-burden, high-acceptability to schools, if proved effective, and cost-effective, the findings will indicate models that are not only empirically tested but also offer high potential for widespread use and, therefore, potentially widespread benefits beyond the life of the trial. Trial registration ISRCTN16386254. Registered on 30 August 2018.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document