Cargando…

How big does the effect of an intervention have to be? Application of two novel methods to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of a fall prevention programme: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION: This project concerns the identification of the smallest worthwhile effect (SWE) of exercise-based programmes to prevent falls in older people. The SWE is the smallest effect that justifies the costs, risks and inconveniences of an intervention and is used to inform the design and inte...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Franco, Marcia Rodrigues, Ferreira, Manuela L, Howard, Kirsten, Sherrington, Catherine, Rose, John, Haines, Terry P, Ferreira, Paulo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3586108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23388197
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002355
_version_ 1782261267578224640
author Franco, Marcia Rodrigues
Ferreira, Manuela L
Howard, Kirsten
Sherrington, Catherine
Rose, John
Haines, Terry P
Ferreira, Paulo
author_facet Franco, Marcia Rodrigues
Ferreira, Manuela L
Howard, Kirsten
Sherrington, Catherine
Rose, John
Haines, Terry P
Ferreira, Paulo
author_sort Franco, Marcia Rodrigues
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: This project concerns the identification of the smallest worthwhile effect (SWE) of exercise-based programmes to prevent falls in older people. The SWE is the smallest effect that justifies the costs, risks and inconveniences of an intervention and is used to inform the design and interpretation of systematic reviews and randomised clinical trials. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will comprise two different methodological approaches: the benefit-harm trade-off method and the discrete choice experiment to estimate the SWE of exercise interventions to prevent falls in older people. In the benefit-harm trade-off method, hypothetical scenarios with the benefits, costs, risks and inconveniences associated with the intervention will be presented to each participant. Then, assuming a treatment effect of certain magnitude, the participant will be asked if he or she would choose to have the intervention. The size of the hypothetical benefit will be varied up and down until it is possible to identify the SWE for which the participant would choose to have the intervention. In the discrete choice experiment, the same attributes (benefits, costs, risks and inconveniences) with varying levels will be presented as choice sets, and participants will be asked to choose between these choice sets. With this approach, we will determine the probability that a person will consider the effects of an intervention to be worthwhile, given the particular costs, risks and inconveniences. For each of the two approaches, participants will be interviewed in person and on different occasions. A subsample of the total cohort will participate in both interviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project has received Ethics Approval from the University of Sydney Human Ethics Committee (Protocol number: 14404). Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations, seminars and peer-reviewed scientific journals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3586108
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35861082013-03-11 How big does the effect of an intervention have to be? Application of two novel methods to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of a fall prevention programme: a study protocol Franco, Marcia Rodrigues Ferreira, Manuela L Howard, Kirsten Sherrington, Catherine Rose, John Haines, Terry P Ferreira, Paulo BMJ Open Geriatric Medicine INTRODUCTION: This project concerns the identification of the smallest worthwhile effect (SWE) of exercise-based programmes to prevent falls in older people. The SWE is the smallest effect that justifies the costs, risks and inconveniences of an intervention and is used to inform the design and interpretation of systematic reviews and randomised clinical trials. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will comprise two different methodological approaches: the benefit-harm trade-off method and the discrete choice experiment to estimate the SWE of exercise interventions to prevent falls in older people. In the benefit-harm trade-off method, hypothetical scenarios with the benefits, costs, risks and inconveniences associated with the intervention will be presented to each participant. Then, assuming a treatment effect of certain magnitude, the participant will be asked if he or she would choose to have the intervention. The size of the hypothetical benefit will be varied up and down until it is possible to identify the SWE for which the participant would choose to have the intervention. In the discrete choice experiment, the same attributes (benefits, costs, risks and inconveniences) with varying levels will be presented as choice sets, and participants will be asked to choose between these choice sets. With this approach, we will determine the probability that a person will consider the effects of an intervention to be worthwhile, given the particular costs, risks and inconveniences. For each of the two approaches, participants will be interviewed in person and on different occasions. A subsample of the total cohort will participate in both interviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project has received Ethics Approval from the University of Sydney Human Ethics Committee (Protocol number: 14404). Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations, seminars and peer-reviewed scientific journals. BMJ Publishing Group 2013-02-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3586108/ /pubmed/23388197 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002355 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.
spellingShingle Geriatric Medicine
Franco, Marcia Rodrigues
Ferreira, Manuela L
Howard, Kirsten
Sherrington, Catherine
Rose, John
Haines, Terry P
Ferreira, Paulo
How big does the effect of an intervention have to be? Application of two novel methods to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of a fall prevention programme: a study protocol
title How big does the effect of an intervention have to be? Application of two novel methods to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of a fall prevention programme: a study protocol
title_full How big does the effect of an intervention have to be? Application of two novel methods to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of a fall prevention programme: a study protocol
title_fullStr How big does the effect of an intervention have to be? Application of two novel methods to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of a fall prevention programme: a study protocol
title_full_unstemmed How big does the effect of an intervention have to be? Application of two novel methods to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of a fall prevention programme: a study protocol
title_short How big does the effect of an intervention have to be? Application of two novel methods to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of a fall prevention programme: a study protocol
title_sort how big does the effect of an intervention have to be? application of two novel methods to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of a fall prevention programme: a study protocol
topic Geriatric Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3586108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23388197
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002355
work_keys_str_mv AT francomarciarodrigues howbigdoestheeffectofaninterventionhavetobeapplicationoftwonovelmethodstodeterminethesmallestworthwhileeffectofafallpreventionprogrammeastudyprotocol
AT ferreiramanuelal howbigdoestheeffectofaninterventionhavetobeapplicationoftwonovelmethodstodeterminethesmallestworthwhileeffectofafallpreventionprogrammeastudyprotocol
AT howardkirsten howbigdoestheeffectofaninterventionhavetobeapplicationoftwonovelmethodstodeterminethesmallestworthwhileeffectofafallpreventionprogrammeastudyprotocol
AT sherringtoncatherine howbigdoestheeffectofaninterventionhavetobeapplicationoftwonovelmethodstodeterminethesmallestworthwhileeffectofafallpreventionprogrammeastudyprotocol
AT rosejohn howbigdoestheeffectofaninterventionhavetobeapplicationoftwonovelmethodstodeterminethesmallestworthwhileeffectofafallpreventionprogrammeastudyprotocol
AT hainesterryp howbigdoestheeffectofaninterventionhavetobeapplicationoftwonovelmethodstodeterminethesmallestworthwhileeffectofafallpreventionprogrammeastudyprotocol
AT ferreirapaulo howbigdoestheeffectofaninterventionhavetobeapplicationoftwonovelmethodstodeterminethesmallestworthwhileeffectofafallpreventionprogrammeastudyprotocol