Childhood obesity intervention studies: A narrative review and guide for investigators, authors, editors, reviewers, journalists, and readers to guard against exaggerated effectiveness claims.

Clicks: 474
ID: 12058
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #1 of 29 articles by views in Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Being able to draw accurate conclusions from childhood obesity trials is important to make advances in reversing the obesity epidemic. However, obesity research sometimes is not conducted or reported to appropriate scientific standards. To constructively draw attention to this issue, we present 10 errors that are commonly committed, illustrate each error with examples from the childhood obesity literature, and follow with suggestions on how to avoid these errors. These errors are as follows: using self-reported outcomes and teaching to the test; foregoing control groups and risking regression to the mean creating differences over time; changing the goal posts; ignoring clustering in studies that randomize groups of children; following the forking paths, subsetting, p-hacking, and data dredging; basing conclusions on tests for significant differences from baseline; equating "no statistically significant difference" with "equally effective"; ignoring intervention study results in favor of observational analyses; using one-sided testing for statistical significance; and stating that effects are clinically significant even though they are not statistically significant. We hope that compiling these errors in one article will serve as the beginning of a checklist to support fidelity in conducting, analyzing, and reporting childhood obesity research.
Reference Key
brown2019childhoodobesity Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Brown, Andrew W;Altman, Douglas G;Baranowski, Tom;Bland, J Martin;Dawson, John A;Dhurandhar, Nikhil V;Dowla, Shima;Fontaine, Kevin R;Gelman, Andrew;Heymsfield, Steven B;Jayawardene, Wasantha;Keith, Scott W;Kyle, Theodore K;Loken, Eric;Oakes, J Michael;Stevens, June;Thomas, Diana M;Allison, David B;
Journal Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity
Year 2019
DOI
10.1111/obr.12923
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.