Home > Publications . Search All . Browse All . Country . Browse PSC Pubs . PSC Report Series

PSC In The News

RSS Feed icon

Miech on 'generational forgetting' about drug-use dangers

Impacts of H-1B visas: Lower prices and higher production - or lower wages and higher profits?

MTF data show 10% of 19-20 year-olds report bouts of drinking 10-plus alcoholic beverages

More News

Highlights

Call for papers: Conference on computational social science, April 2017, U-M

Sioban Harlow honored with 2017 Sarah Goddard Power Award for commitment to women's health

Post-doc fellowship in computational social science for summer or fall 2017, U-Penn

ICPSR Summer Program scholarships to support training in statistics, quantitative methods, research design, and data analysis

More Highlights

Next Brown Bag

Mon, Feb 13, 2017, noon:
Daniel Almirall, "Getting SMART about adaptive interventions"

Comparison of a phased experimental approach and a single randomized clinical trial for developing multicomponent behavioral interventions

Publication Abstract

Collins, L.M., B. Chokraborty, Susan A. Murphy, and V. Strecher. 2009. "Comparison of a phased experimental approach and a single randomized clinical trial for developing multicomponent behavioral interventions." Clinical Trials, 6(1): 5-15.

Background Many interventions in today's health sciences are multicomponent, and often one or more of the components are behavioral. Two approaches to building behavioral interventions empirically can be identified. The more typically used approach, labeled here the classical approach, consists of constructing a likely best intervention a priori, and then evaluating the intervention in a standard randomized controlled trial (RCT). By contrast, the emergent phased experimental approach involves programmatic phases of empirical research and discovery aimed at identifying individual intervention component effects and the best combination of components and levels. Purpose The purpose of this article is to provide a head-to-head comparison between the classical and phased experimental approaches and thereby highlight the relative advantages and disadvantages of these approaches when they are used to select program components and levels so as to arrive at the most potent intervention. Methods A computer simulation was performed in which the classical and phased experimental approaches to intervention development were applied to the same randomly generated data. Results The phased experimental approach resulted in better mean intervention outcomes when the intervention effect size was medium or large, whereas the classical approach resulted in better mean intervention outcomes when the effect size was small. The phased experimental approach led to identification of the correct set of intervention components and levels at a higher rate than the classical approach across all conditions. Limitations Some potentially important factors were not varied in the simulation, for example the underlying structural model and the number of intervention components. Conclusions The phased experimental approach merits serious consideration, because it has the potential to enable intervention scientists to develop more efficacious behavioral interventions. Clinical Trials 2009; 6: 5-15. http://ctj.sagepub.com

DOI:10.1177/1740774508100973 (Full Text)

PMCID: PMC2711350. (Pub Med Central)

Country of focus: United States of America.

Browse | Search : All Pubs | Next