Article

Ain't Necessarily So: Review and Critique of Recent Meta-Analyses of Behavioral Medicine Interventions in Health Psychology

Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 3535 Market St., Room 676, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Health Psychology (Impact Factor: 3.59). 03/2010; 29(2):107-16. DOI: 10.1037/a0017633
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

We examined four meta-analyses of behavioral interventions for adults (Dixon, Keefe, Scipio, Perri, & Abernethy, 2007; Hoffman, Papas, Chatkoff, & Kerns, 2007; Irwin, Cole, & Nicassio, 2006; and Jacobsen, Donovan, Vadaparampil, & Small, 2007) that have appeared in the Evidence Based Treatment Reviews section of Health Psychology.
Narrative review.
We applied the following criteria to each meta-analysis: (1) whether each meta-analysis was described accurately, adequately, and transparently in the article; (2) whether there was an adequate attempt to deal with methodological quality of the original trials; (3) the extent to which the meta-analysis depended on small, underpowered studies; and (4) the extent to which the meta-analysis provided valid and useful evidence-based recommendations.
Across the four meta-analyses, we identified substantial problems with the transparency and completeness with which these meta-analyses were reported, as well as a dependence on small, underpowered trials of generally poor quality.
Results of our exercise raise questions about the clinical validity and utility of the conclusions of these meta-analyses. Results should serve as a wake up call to prospective authors, reviewers, and end-users of meta-analyses now appearing in the literature.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: James C Coyne
  • Source
    • "Similarly, although participants who were prompted to monitor distance from the goal did so more frequently than those prompted to monitor their rate of progress toward their goal, both forms of monitoring were equally effective in promoting goal attainment. However, only three primary studies prompted participants to consider their rate of goal progress and so further tests are needed to draw firm conclusions, especially as small samples tend to bias the effect size upward (Coyne et al., 2010). Indeed, few empirical studies have explicitly investigated whether people are sensitive to the rate of discrepancy reduction (see, however,Gollwitzer & Rohloff, 1999;Hsee & Abelson, 1991, for notable exceptions). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Control theory and other frameworks for understanding self-regulation suggest that monitoring goal progress is a crucial process that intervenes between setting and attaining a goal, and helps to ensure that goals are translated into action. However, the impact of progress monitoring interventions on rates of behavioral performance and goal attainment has yet to be quantified. A systematic literature search identified 138 studies (N �= 19,951) that randomly allocated participants to an intervention designed to promote monitoring of goal progress versus a control condition. All studies reported the effects of the treatment on (a) the frequency of progress monitoring and (b) subsequent goal attainment. A random effects model revealed that, on average, interventions were successful at increasing the frequency of monitoring goal progress (d� �= 1.98, 95% CI [1.71, 2.24]) and promoted goal attainment (d� �= 0.40, 95% CI [0.32, 0.48]). Furthermore, changes in the frequency of progress monitoring mediated the effect of the interventions on goal attainment. Moderation tests revealed that progress monitoring had larger effects on goal attainment when the outcomes were reported or made public, and when the information was physically recorded. Taken together, the findings suggest that monitoring goal progress is an effective self-regulation strategy, and that interventions that increase the frequency of progress monitoring are likely to promote behavior change.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2016 · Psychological Bulletin
    • "Sensitivity analysis was performed in order to detect whether the overall effect was robust to the exclusion of small studies, outliers, studies with low retention and high risk of bias, and across the type of adherence measure and timepoint of the followup . We excluded studies with small sample sizes for the first sensitivity analysis (using a recommended cut-off where the sample size of either the intervention or control group was o35 (Coyne et al., 2010)), resulting in the inclusion of only 5 studies (Sajatovic et al., 2009; Eker and Harkin, 2012; Lenz, 2010; Colom et al., 2003; Reinares et al., 2008). We excluded one study from the primary analysis due to its extremely large effect size and therefore being classed as an outlier (Dogan and Sabanciogullari, 2003). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Medication non-adherence in bipolar disorder is a significant problem resulting in increased morbidity, hospitalisation and suicide. Interventions to enhance adherence exist but it is not clear how effective they are, or what works and why. Methods: We systematically searched bibliographic databases for RCTs of interventions to support adherence to medication in bipolar disorder. Study selection and data extraction was performed by two investigators. Data was extracted on intervention design and delivery, study characteristics, adherence outcomes and study quality. The meta-analysis used pooled odds ratios for adherence using random effects models. Results: Searches identified 795 studies, of which 24 met the inclusion criteria, 18 provided sufficient data for meta-analysis. The pooled OR was 2.27 (95% CI 1.45-3.56) equivalent to a two-fold increase in the odds of adherence in the intervention group relative to control. Smaller effects were seen where the control group consisted of an active comparison and with increasing intervention length. The effects were robust across other factors of intervention and study design and delivery. Limitations: Many studies did not report sufficient information to classify intervention design and delivery or judge quality and the interventions were highly variable. Therefore, the scope of moderation analysis was limited. Conclusions: Even brief interventions can improve medication adherence. Limitations in intervention and study design and reporting prevented assessment of which elements of adherence support are most effective. Applying published guidance and quality criteria for designing and reporting adherence interventions is a priority to inform the implementation of cost-effective adherence support.
    No preview · Article · Jan 2016 · Journal of Affective Disorders
  • Source
    • "The inclusion of underpowered studies with limited methodological quality may have biased the results of previous meta-analyses [45] [46]. In the present systematic review, no psychotherapy RCT met inclusion criteria. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: While women with breast cancer often face varying levels of psychological distress, there is a subgroup whose symptomatology reaches a threshold for diagnosis of major depressive disorder (MDD). Major depressive disorder is known to influence patient outcomes, such as health-related quality of life and treatment adherence. There are no systematic reviews that evaluate pharmacological and psychotherapeutic treatment trials for MDD among individuals with breast cancer. Two authors independently searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and Clinical Trials.gov databases through February 20, 2013 without language restrictions. Core journals, reference lists and citation tracking were also searched. Articles on breast cancer patients were included if they (1) included participants with a diagnosis of MDD; (2) investigated pharmacological or psychotherapeutic treatments for MDD compared to placebo or usual care in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Two RCTs on antidepressant treatment met inclusion criteria. However, no RCTs investigating the effects of psychological treatments for MDD in breast cancer were identified. Notwithstanding the paucity of data investigating the effects of psychological treatments for MDD in breast cancer, numerous psychotherapeutic strategies targeting depressive symptoms were identified. Mianserin had significant antidepressant effects when compared to placebo in a 6-week, parallel-group, RCT of Stage I-II breast cancer in women with MDD. Desipramine and paroxetine were reported to be no more efficacious than placebo in a 6-week, RCT of Stage I-IV breast cancer in women with MDD. The evidence reviewed herein underscores the paucity of data available to guide clinicians in treatment decisions for MDD in individuals with breast cancer. Therefore, the treatment of MDD in breast cancer is primarily based on clinical experience. Some antidepressants (for example, paroxetine) should be avoided in women concurrently taking tamoxifen due to relevant interactions involving the cytochrome CYP2D6.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2013 · Cancer Treatment Reviews
Show more