Are the Risk of Generalizability Biases Generalizable? A Meta-Epidemiological Study.

Background: Preliminary studies (e.g., pilot/feasibility studies) can result in misleading evidence that an intervention is ready to be evaluated in a large-scale trial when it is not. Risk of Generalizability Biases (RGBs, a set of external validity biases) represent study features that influence estimates of effectiveness, often inflating estimates in preliminary studies which are not replicated in larger-scale trials. While RGBs have been empirically established in interventions targeting obesity, the extent to which RGBs generalize to other health areas is unknown. Understanding the relevance of RGBs across health behavior intervention research can inform organized efforts to reduce their prevalence. Purpose: The purpose of our study was to examine whether RGBs generalize outside of obesity-related interventions. Methods: A systematic review identified health behavior interventions across four behaviors unrelated to obesity that follow a similar intervention development framework of preliminary studies informing larger-scale trials (i.e., tobacco use disorder, alcohol use disorder, interpersonal violence, and behaviors related to increased sexually transmitted infections). To be included, published interventions had to be tested in a preliminary study followed by testing in a larger trial (the two studies thus comprising a study pair). We extracted health-related outcomes and coded the presence/absence of RGBs. We used meta-regression models to estimate the impact of RGBs on the change in standardized mean difference (ΔSMD) between the preliminary study and larger trial. Results: We identified sixty-nine study pairs, of which forty-seven were eligible for inclusion in the analysis (k = 156 effects), with RGBs identified for each behavior. For pairs where the RGB was present in the preliminary study but removed in the larger trial the treatment effect decreased by an average of ΔSMD=-0.38 (range - 0.69 to -0.21). This provides evidence of larger drop in effectiveness for studies containing RGBs relative to study pairs with no RGBs present (treatment effect decreased by an average of ΔSMD =-0.24, range - 0.19 to -0.27). Conclusion: RGBs may be associated with higher effect estimates across diverse areas of health intervention research. These findings suggest commonalities shared across health behavior intervention fields may facilitate introduction of RGBs within preliminary studies, rather than RGBs being isolated to a single health behavior field.

Adverse pregnancy outcomes and renal-vascular function in the early years after delivery.

Adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs: hypertensive disorders, gestational diabetes, preterm birth, and placental disorders) are associated with cardiovascular disease risk or blood volume abnormalities. Traditional risk factors might not identify highest risk people in the early years after APO deliveries. Test the hypothesis that vascular function is worse, and plasma volume-regulating renal hormones are lower after delivery in people who did versus did not have an APO. Adult participants 6 mo-3 years postdelivery of a singleton infant participated in this cross-sectional study. Exclusion criteria included current smoking, current use of certain medications, and diabetes outside of pregnancy. Differences in measurements between participants with versus without APOs were determined with t tests or Wilcoxon tests. Associations of renal hormones with APO history were assessed with linear regression, adjusted for age, race, body mass index (BMI), and sodium consumption. Of 86 participants, 38 (44%) had an APO history. Those with APOs were more likely to identify as Black and had a higher BMI, 34.0 kg/m2 [interquartile range (IQR), 24.6, 39.3] versus 24.2 kg/m2 [IQR, 21.2, 31.3], P < 0.05. Most brachial and all aortic blood pressures were higher in those with APOs: median aortic blood pressure was 102/74 versus 96/68 mmHg, P ≤ 0.05. There were no differences in arterial stiffness or endothelial function between groups. Aldosterone was lower (54 [IQR, 28-84] vs. 80 [IQR, 39-150] pmol/L) in participants with past APOs. Blood pressures were higher, and aldosterone was lower in participants with past APOs. Associations of aldosterone with APO history persisted after adjustment. Neither renin nor aldosterone were related to vascular function.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs) are associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Traditional CVD risk factors may not fully capture excess CVD risk soon after APOs. Vascular dysfunction and plasma volume irregularities may be detectable. We found people with APOs had worse blood pressures, higher BMI, and lower aldosterone levels versus those without APOs in the early years after delivery. Vascular function was similar between groups. Future research should assess vascular function and renal hormones at multiple timepoints during the perinatal period.

Measuring Overweight and Obesity in Persons with Spinal Cord Injury: What Do Health Providers Use and What are the Challenges?

INTRODUCTION: Obesity is a significant health concern for veterans and individuals with spinal cord injury, yet screening for overweight/obesity can be challenging. This study examines how healthcare providers screen for overweight/obesity and the challenges encountered in identifying overweight/obesity in veterans and persons with spinal cord injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Healthcare providers who provide care for persons with spinal cord injury completed a semi-structured interview. The interview explored their perspectives on measuring overweight/obesity in persons with spinal cord injury and the challenges they faced. Thematic analysis was used to identify themes that emerged from the interviews. RESULTS: Twenty-five providers (88% female with an average experience of 9.6 ± 7.3 years in providing care for spinal cord injury patients) participated in the interviews. The themes described the health indicators and equipment used to assess overweight/obesity, provider concerns regarding measurement, and criteria for classifying overweight/obesity. Body weight and body mass index were the most commonly used indicators. However, concerns were raised regarding accuracy of these measures for spinal cord injury patients, as well as issues related to the accessibility, calibration, and usability of the equipment. Many providers reported using standard body mass index ranges and categories instead of those specific to spinal cord injury. CONCLUSION: This study identified the most commonly used indicators of weight or body composition in veterans and persons with spinal cord injury and highlighted providers' concerns with these measures. Future research is needed to identify the most feasible, accurate, and appropriate health indicators that could be used in a clinical setting to identify overweight and obesity in this population.

The mysterious case of the disappearing pilot study: a review of publication bias in preliminary behavioral interventions presented at health behavior conferences.

BACKGROUND: The number of preliminary studies conducted and published has increased in recent years. However, there are likely many preliminary studies that go unpublished because preliminary studies are typically small and may not be perceived as methodologically rigorous. The extent of publication bias within preliminary studies is unknown but can prove useful to determine whether preliminary studies appearing in peer-reviewed journals are fundamentally different than those that are unpublished. The purpose of this study was to identify characteristics associated with publication in a sample of abstracts of preliminary studies of behavioral interventions presented at conferences. METHODS: Abstract supplements from two primary outlets for behavioral intervention research (Society of Behavioral Medicine and International Society of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity) were searched to identify all abstracts reporting findings of behavioral interventions from preliminary studies. Study characteristics were extracted from the abstracts including year presented, sample size, design, and statistical significance. To determine if abstracts had a matching peer-reviewed publication, a search of authors' curriculum vitae and research databases was conducted. Iterative logistic regression models were used to estimate odds of abstract publication. Authors with unpublished preliminary studies were surveyed to identify reasons for nonpublication. RESULTS: Across conferences, a total of 18,961 abstracts were presented. Of these, 791 were preliminary behavioral interventions, of which 49% (388) were published in a peer-reviewed journal. For models with main effects only, preliminary studies with sample sizes greater than n = 24 were more likely to be published (range of odds ratios, 1.82 to 2.01). For models including interactions among study characteristics, no significant associations were found. Authors of unpublished preliminary studies indicated small sample sizes and being underpowered to detect effects as barriers to attempting publication. CONCLUSIONS: Half of preliminary studies presented at conferences go unpublished, but published preliminary studies appearing in peer-reviewed literature are not systematically different from those that remain unpublished. Without publication, it is difficult to assess the quality of information regarding the early-stage development of interventions. This inaccessibility inhibits our ability to learn from the progression of preliminary studies.