Cargando…

Validation of remote height and weight assessment in a rural randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to describe and assess a remote height and weight protocol that was developed for an ongoing trial conducted during the SARS COV-2 pandemic. METHODS: Thirty-eight rural families (children 8.3 ± 0.7 years; 68% female; and caregivers 38.2 ± 6.1 years) were prov...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Forseth, Bethany, Davis, Ann M., Bakula, Dana M., Murray, Megan, Dean, Kelsey, Swinburne Romine, Rebecca E., Fleming, Kandace
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9272872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35818033
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01669-8
_version_ 1784744961978138624
author Forseth, Bethany
Davis, Ann M.
Bakula, Dana M.
Murray, Megan
Dean, Kelsey
Swinburne Romine, Rebecca E.
Fleming, Kandace
author_facet Forseth, Bethany
Davis, Ann M.
Bakula, Dana M.
Murray, Megan
Dean, Kelsey
Swinburne Romine, Rebecca E.
Fleming, Kandace
author_sort Forseth, Bethany
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to describe and assess a remote height and weight protocol that was developed for an ongoing trial conducted during the SARS COV-2 pandemic. METHODS: Thirty-eight rural families (children 8.3 ± 0.7 years; 68% female; and caregivers 38.2 ± 6.1 years) were provided detailed instructions on how to measure height and weight. Families obtained measures via remote data collection (caregiver weight, child height and weight) and also by trained staff. Differences between data collection methods were examined. RESULTS: Per absolute mean difference analyses, slightly larger differences were found for child weight (0.21 ± 0.21 kg), child height (1.53 ± 1.29 cm), and caregiver weight (0.48 ± 0.42 kg) between school and home measurements. Both analyses indicate differences had only minor impact on child BMI percentile (− 0.12, 0.68) and parent BMI (0.05, 0.13). Intraclass coefficients ranged from 0.98 to 1.00 indicating that almost all of the variance was due to between person differences and not measurement differences within a person. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that remote height and weight collection is feasible for caregivers and children and that there are minimal differences in the various measurement methods studied here when assessing group differences. These differences did not have clinically meaningful impacts on BMI. This is promising for the use of remote height and weight measurement in clinical trials, especially for hard-to reach-populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical. Registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03304249) on 06/10/2017.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9272872
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92728722022-07-11 Validation of remote height and weight assessment in a rural randomized clinical trial Forseth, Bethany Davis, Ann M. Bakula, Dana M. Murray, Megan Dean, Kelsey Swinburne Romine, Rebecca E. Fleming, Kandace BMC Med Res Methodol Research BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to describe and assess a remote height and weight protocol that was developed for an ongoing trial conducted during the SARS COV-2 pandemic. METHODS: Thirty-eight rural families (children 8.3 ± 0.7 years; 68% female; and caregivers 38.2 ± 6.1 years) were provided detailed instructions on how to measure height and weight. Families obtained measures via remote data collection (caregiver weight, child height and weight) and also by trained staff. Differences between data collection methods were examined. RESULTS: Per absolute mean difference analyses, slightly larger differences were found for child weight (0.21 ± 0.21 kg), child height (1.53 ± 1.29 cm), and caregiver weight (0.48 ± 0.42 kg) between school and home measurements. Both analyses indicate differences had only minor impact on child BMI percentile (− 0.12, 0.68) and parent BMI (0.05, 0.13). Intraclass coefficients ranged from 0.98 to 1.00 indicating that almost all of the variance was due to between person differences and not measurement differences within a person. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that remote height and weight collection is feasible for caregivers and children and that there are minimal differences in the various measurement methods studied here when assessing group differences. These differences did not have clinically meaningful impacts on BMI. This is promising for the use of remote height and weight measurement in clinical trials, especially for hard-to reach-populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical. Registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03304249) on 06/10/2017. BioMed Central 2022-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9272872/ /pubmed/35818033 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01669-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Forseth, Bethany
Davis, Ann M.
Bakula, Dana M.
Murray, Megan
Dean, Kelsey
Swinburne Romine, Rebecca E.
Fleming, Kandace
Validation of remote height and weight assessment in a rural randomized clinical trial
title Validation of remote height and weight assessment in a rural randomized clinical trial
title_full Validation of remote height and weight assessment in a rural randomized clinical trial
title_fullStr Validation of remote height and weight assessment in a rural randomized clinical trial
title_full_unstemmed Validation of remote height and weight assessment in a rural randomized clinical trial
title_short Validation of remote height and weight assessment in a rural randomized clinical trial
title_sort validation of remote height and weight assessment in a rural randomized clinical trial
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9272872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35818033
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01669-8
work_keys_str_mv AT forsethbethany validationofremoteheightandweightassessmentinaruralrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT davisannm validationofremoteheightandweightassessmentinaruralrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT bakuladanam validationofremoteheightandweightassessmentinaruralrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT murraymegan validationofremoteheightandweightassessmentinaruralrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT deankelsey validationofremoteheightandweightassessmentinaruralrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT swinburnerominerebeccae validationofremoteheightandweightassessmentinaruralrandomizedclinicaltrial
AT flemingkandace validationofremoteheightandweightassessmentinaruralrandomizedclinicaltrial