Evidence Hub

Context effects and behaviour change techniques in randomised trials: a systematic review using the example of trials to increase adherence to physical activity in musculoskeletal pain

Bishop FL, Fenge-Davies AL, Kirby S, Geraghty AW

Psychology & health, 2015

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe and explore the effects of contextual and behaviour change technique (BCT) content of control and target interventions in clinical trials.

DESIGN: Review and meta-analysis of 42 trials from a Cochrane review of physical activity in chronic musculoskeletal pain.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Two researchers coded descriptions of target and control interventions for (a) 93 BCTs and (b) whether target and control interventions shared each of five contextual features (practitioners' characteristics, patient-practitioner relationship, intervention credibility, superficial treatment characteristics e.g. delivery modality, and environment). Quality of study reporting was assessed. Effect sizes for adherence to physical activity and class attendance were computed (Cohen's d) and analysed separately.

RESULTS: For physical activity outcomes, after controlling for reporting quality, larger effect sizes were associated with target and control interventions using different modalities (β = -.34, p = .030), target and control interventions involving equivalent patient-practitioner relationship (β = .40, p = .002), and target interventions having more unique BCTs (i.e. more BCTs not also in the control) (β = .008, p = .030). There were no significant effect moderators for class attendance outcomes.

CONCLUSION: Contents of control conditions can influence effect sizes and should be considered carefully in trial design and systematic reviews.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free