Quality of randomized controlled trials in eating disorder prevention

Hunna J Watson; Erica L Goodman; Nicole B McLagan; Tara Joyce; Elizabeth French; Vivienne Willan; Sarah J Egan

doi:10.1002/eat.22712

Quality of randomized controlled trials in eating disorder prevention

Int J Eat Disord. 2017 May;50(5):459-470. doi: 10.1002/eat.22712. Epub 2017 May 10.

Authors

Hunna J Watson^{1

2

3

4}, Erica L Goodman^{1

5}, Nicole B McLagan⁴, Tara Joyce⁴, Elizabeth French⁴, Vivienne Willan⁴, Sarah J Egan⁴

Affiliations

¹ Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
² Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
³ School of Paediatrics and Child Health, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
⁴ School of Psychology and Speech Pathology, Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
⁵ Department of Clinical Psychology, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, North Dakota.

PMID: 28489337
DOI: 10.1002/eat.22712

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of eating disorder prevention.

Method: A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Collaboration Library to January 2016. Studies were included if they were RCTs that tested an eating disorder prevention program. We identified 96 studies with a total 15,350 participants (91% female, M age = 17 years) and rated quality with the Quality Rating Scale (QRS; Moncrieff et al., 2001).

Results: The mean QRS score was 62% (SD = 13%). Several standards of quality were not frequently fulfilled (i.e., failed to achieve an optimal rating), for example, power calculation (85%), intent-to-treat analysis (54%), blinding of assessor (75%), representative sample (78%), adequate sample size (75%), and appropriate duration of trial including follow-up (67%). QRS was positively and significantly associated with publication year, number of authors, and PubMed-indexation.

Discussion: Given the majority of eating disorder prevention studies had problems with trial quality, it is recommended that future RCTs follow quality checklists and CONSORT guidelines, that RCTs are registered, and protocols published in advance. In addition, funding bodies are called on to deliver the support needed to ensure that preventions for eating disorders are efficiently and cost-effectively achieved.

Keywords: bias; eating disorders; prevention; quality; randomized controlled trials.

Publication types

Review

MeSH terms

Adolescent
Feeding and Eating Disorders / prevention & control*
Female
Humans
Male
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic