Childhood Obesity Intervention Studies: A Narrative Review and Guide for Investigators, Authors, Editors, Reviewers, Journalists, and Readers to Guard Against Exaggerated Effectiveness Claims

dc.contributor.authorBrown, Andrew W.
dc.contributor.authorAltman, Douglas G.
dc.contributor.authorBaranowski, Tom
dc.contributor.authorBland, J. Martin
dc.contributor.authorDawson, John A.
dc.contributor.authorDhurandhar, Nikhil V.
dc.contributor.authorDowla, Shima
dc.contributor.authorFontaine, Kevin R.
dc.contributor.authorGelman, Andrew
dc.contributor.authorHeymsfield, Steven B.
dc.contributor.authorJayawardene, Wasantha
dc.contributor.authorKeith, Scott W.
dc.contributor.authorKyle, Theodore K.
dc.contributor.authorLoken, Eric
dc.contributor.authorOakes, J. Michael
dc.contributor.authorStevens, June
dc.contributor.authorThomas, Diana M.
dc.contributor.authorAllison, David B.
dc.date.accessioned2025-02-20T16:27:32Z
dc.date.available2025-02-20T16:27:32Z
dc.date.issued2019-08-19
dc.description.abstractBeing able to draw accurate conclusions from childhood obesity trials is important to make advances in reversing the obesity epidemic. However, obesity research sometimes is not conducted or reported to appropriate scientific standards. To constructively draw attention to this issue, we present 10 errors that are commonly committed, illustrate each error with examples from the childhood obesity literature, and follow with suggestions on how to avoid these errors. These errors are: Using self-reported outcomes and teaching to the test; Foregoing control groups and risking regression to the mean creating differences over time; Changing the goal posts; Ignoring clustering in studies that randomize groups of children; Following the forking paths, sub-setting, p-hacking, and data dredging; Basing conclusions on tests for significant differences from baseline; Equating ‘no statistically significant difference’ with ‘equally effective’; Ignoring intervention study results in favor of observational analyses; Using one-sided testing for statistical significance; and, Stating that effects are clinically significant even though they are not statistically significant. We hope that compiling these errors in one article will serve as the beginning of a checklist to support fidelity in conducting, analyzing, and reporting childhood obesity research.
dc.identifier.citationBrown, Andrew W., et al. "Childhood Obesity Intervention Studies: A Narrative Review and Guide for Investigators, Authors, Editors, Reviewers, Journalists, and Readers to Guard Against Exaggerated Effectiveness Claims." Obesity Reviews, vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 1523-1541, 2019-08-19.
dc.identifier.otherBRITE 4658
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2022/32429
dc.language.isoen
dc.relation.isversionofhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7436851/
dc.relation.journalObesity Reviews
dc.subjectchildhood obesity
dc.subjectcausal inference
dc.subjectinterventions
dc.titleChildhood Obesity Intervention Studies: A Narrative Review and Guide for Investigators, Authors, Editors, Reviewers, Journalists, and Readers to Guard Against Exaggerated Effectiveness Claims

Files

Can’t use the file because of accessibility barriers? Contact us