You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Nutrients
Download PDF
  • Communication
  • Open Access

15 March 2023

Deconstructing Complex Interventions: Piloting a Framework of Delivery Features and Intervention Strategies for the Eating Disorders in Weight-Related Therapy (EDIT) Collaboration

,
,
,
and
1
Children’s Hospital Westmead Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney 2145, Australia
2
Institute of Endocrinology and Diabetes, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney 2145, Australia
3
Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Bedford Park, Adelaide 5042, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nutrients2023, 15(6), 1414;https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15061414
This article belongs to the Special Issue The Role of Nutritional Intervention in Obesity Treatment
Version Notes
Order Reprints

Abstract

(1) Background: weight-management interventions vary in their delivery features and intervention strategies. We aimed to establish a protocol to identify these intervention components. (2) Methods: a framework was developed through literature searches and stakeholder consultation. Six studies were independently coded by two reviewers. Consensus included recording conflict resolutions and framework changes. (3) Results: more conflicts occurred for intervention strategies compared to delivery features; both required the updating of definitions. The average coding times were 78 min (SD: 48) for delivery features and 54 min (SD: 29) for intervention strategies. (4) Conclusions: this study developed a detailed framework and highlights the complexities in objectively mapping weight-management trials.

1. Introduction

Behavioural interventions including diet, physical activity, and psychological components are first-line treatments for obesity [,,,]. However, there are ongoing concerns that behavioural weight management, or some included strategies or methods of delivery, may induce or exacerbate eating disorders [,,]. The eating disorders in weight-related therapy (EDIT) Collaboration aims to identify individual changes in eating disorder risk during weight management; further details are available elsewhere [,]. We hypothesise that specific components of interventions may influence eating disorder risk. For example, dieting predicts eating-disorder development in community samples [], and dieting at a “severe” level is considered risky in terms of the likelihood of triggering binge-eating episodes []. Hence, there is a need to examine interventional evidence to determine whether specific intervention components may increase or decrease eating-disorder risk.
Understanding how intervention components may increase or decrease the risk of eating disorders would enable future interventions to be optimised. To date, no systematic examination of weight-management intervention components relevant to eating disorder risk has been conducted. Evidence shows that multicomponent (dieting, physical activity and behavioural) interventions are, for most people, effective for weight loss in the short term [,]. Further, systematic reviews have demonstrated that some components of these complex interventions may be more effective than others. For example, certain behaviour-change techniques, encouragement for positive health-related behaviours and contact with a dietitian are associated with intervention success [,,]. Such research provides a useful insight into the tailoring of weight-management interventions to improve effectiveness. However, no such evidence synthesis has examined the risk of weight-management interventions. Detailed mapping of weight-management intervention components is an important step in understanding how weight-management trials may increase or decrease eating disorder risk.
This study aimed to establish a detailed, objective coding framework of intervention components (i.e., delivery features and intervention strategies) used in weight-management interventions for the EDIT Collaboration.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Development of a Coding Framework

The coding framework was developed through an iterative consultation process. An initial list of intervention components was drafted (HJ) and refined (NBL and BJJ). The initial codes were then expanded and refined through consultation with experts in the field via the EDIT Collaboration Scientific Advisory Panel and Stakeholder Advisory Panel including clinicians, researchers and people with lived experience of obesity and/or eating disorders []. The revised coding framework was further refined via a stakeholder consultation survey, with input from researchers, clinicians and those with lived experience of obesity and/or eating disorders internationally []. Stakeholders were asked to rate intervention strategies for likelihood to increase or decrease eating disorder risk within the context of weight management, and to identify any additional strategies which may be relevant to eating disorder risk []. A detailed guidebook was developed which included a descriptor for each unique code.
Delivery features are defined as “a broad number of intervention characteristics that relate to how an intervention is delivered” []. Delivery features were developed based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist [], including the overarching goal, target population, materials provided, procedures used, who delivered the intervention, delivery mode, intervention setting and dose, as well as any tailoring, modifications and fidelity measures. We also summarised the number and range of different outcome assessment procedures, as these may unintentionally deliver important messages about the aim and intended outcome of the intervention in addition to the planned intervention content. Categories under each delivery feature item/cluster were developed for this project drawing on relevant examples from child obesity prevention [] and the Human Behaviour Change Project ontologies [,].
Intervention strategies is the broad term used to describe the behaviour change content of interventions grouped under key categories (i.e., highest level grouping) relevant to weight-management interventions. Clusters (i.e., mid-level grouping) of intervention strategies were captured under the following categories: intervention intent, framing and outcomes, dietary strategies, eating behaviours/disorder eating, movement and sleep related strategies, and psychological health-related strategies. There were 86 unique intervention strategies (i.e., lowest-level grouping) across these five clusters.

2.2. Eligibility Criteria for the Pilot

Trials eligible for inclusion in the EDIT Collaboration were randomised controlled trials of behavioural weight-management interventions recruiting adolescents (aged 10 to <19 years at baseline) or adults (aged ≥18 years at baseline) with overweight or obesity defined as body mass index (BMI) z-score > 1 in adolescents and BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 in adults []. Trials must measure eating disorder risk at baseline and post-intervention or follow-up using a validated assessment tool.
Purposeful sampling methods were used to select studies for piloting. Eligible studies (n = 73 as at May 2022) were grouped by decade of publication, with each group weighted by the total number of studies to determine how many studies should be selected from each decade. Both random and purposeful approaches guided the final selection of studies for piloting, ensuring diversity of target population (adolescents, adults), availability of a published protocol and study country. For pragmatic reasons, any studies identified that declined to join the EDIT Collaboration were replaced with a study of a similar profile.

2.3. Pilot Process

Published intervention descriptions, from trial registries, protocol and main results publications, were used to code intervention components using a standardised procedure following a brief training session. The training session involved familiarisation with the coding framework and practising coding to assist with consistency. Each unique intervention arm was coded by two independent coders (RK and SP, with a background in dietetics, and psychology, respectively), conflicts were identified and resolved through discussion (all authors). Duration of coding time was recorded.
Following initial coding and consensus of all studies, all authors critically discussed and reviewed the coding framework to ensure adequate coverage and clarity of delivery features and intervention strategies. Existing codes and descriptors were refined and additional codes included from discussion. Studies were then recoded using the updated codes.

2.4. Synthesis of Results

Descriptive statistics were used to summarise coding conflicts, number of modifications to the codebook, and to calculate the average and standard deviation (SD) of the time required to code components of each study. Results were synthesised separately for delivery features and intervention strategies, and examined by cluster.

3. Results

The characteristics of the selected studies are available in Supplementary Table S1. Six studies consisting of a total of 14 active intervention arms were selected. The included studies originated from the United States of America (n = 3), Australia (n = 1), Brazil (n = 1), and the United Kingdom (n = 1). The average time to code each study was 78 min (SD: 48) for delivery features and 54 min (SD: 29) for intervention strategies.
There was a greater number of coding conflicts in the intervention strategies (n = 237, 19.7%) compared to the delivery features (n = 156, 13.9%) (Table 1). The number of conflicts for each intervention arm ranged between 7 and 16 (8.9–20.5%) for delivery features and 2 and 34 (2.3–39.5%) for intervention strategies. When coding the delivery features, unclear definitions were the most common reason for conflicts and updating these definitions was required to achieve consensus. For instance, “duration of contact” was redefined to duration in minutes rather than brief, moderate or extended contact, which was subjective and difficult to code. In contrast, the consensus discussions for the intervention strategies revealed varying interpretations of definitions due to differing coder backgrounds. For example, the cluster “delivery of dietary intervention” had the greatest proportion of conflicts due to one coder having a comprehensive knowledge of clinical dietetic interventions. A total of 43 code definitions were modified, 15 new variables were added, and 7 were removed following the consensus meetings (Supplementary Table S2).
Table 1. Summary of conflicts across clusters of intervention components.
Consensus procedures for the new code resulted in 28 conflicts (13.3%) which were resolved through discussion and no further updates to variable definitions were required. The final revised coding framework included 86 delivery features (Table 2) and 88 intervention strategies (Table 3).
Table 2. Codebook of delivery features a.
Table 3. Codebook for intervention strategies.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

The EDIT Collaboration aims to identify intervention components that increase or decrease eating disorder risk as part of weight-management interventions []. We developed a framework for identifying intervention components, by deconstructing complex interventions into well-defined delivery features and intervention strategies. Using an established coding framework reduces the subjectivity of intervention deconstruction. In addition, this pilot study demonstrates the resourcing required to conduct a comprehensive deconstruction of complex interventions.
Our study highlights the need for utilising established and tested definitions to appropriately deconstruct complex behavioural interventions. The taxonomic deconstruction of interventions is useful for examining which components of an intervention may be driving outcomes. However, previous studies of deconstruction behavioural weight-management interventions have predominately focussed on weight outcomes [,,,] or other measures of effectiveness [,,]. Future research should consider whether interventions, or components of interventions produce unintended effects, such as increasing eating-disorder risk [].
The strengths of this study include the use of a systematic coding process to validate the codes and definitions within the framework developed through extensive stakeholder consultation involving expertise from both the obesity and eating disorder fields. The framework was tested on a range of studies, varying in population (adolescents, adults), countries, and publication date. Coders were from differing disciplines (dietetics and psychology). The limitations include reliance on published or publicly available intervention descriptions, which may provide insufficient detail in the reporting of intervention components []. Further, we did not quantify the frequency or intensity of the intervention strategies.
Our coding framework will be implemented for all trials included in the EDIT Collaboration to examine eating-disorder risk during weight management []. Moreover, this framework can provide insight into a broad range of weight-management interventions and can be transferred or adapted to examine other safety or effectiveness outcomes (e.g., weight regain, health-related QOL, depression, etc). Coding frameworks, such as the one developed in this study, can assist in the transparent and systematic coding of existing interventions to enhance our understanding of the components of complex interventions.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/nu15061414/s1, Table S1: Characteristics of studies included in pilot coding; Table S2: Modifications to coding framework [,,,,,].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.B.L., H.J. and B.J.J.; methodology, N.B.L., H.J., R.K. and B.J.J.; formal analysis, N.B.L., R.K., S.P. and B.J.J.; investigation, R.K. and S.P.; writing—original draft preparation, N.B.L. and B.J.J.; writing—review and editing, H.J., R.K. and S.P.; visualization, R.K.; supervision, N.B.L., H.J. and B.J.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The EDIT Collaboration is funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Ideas Grant (#2002310). N.B.L. is in receipt of an NHMRC Peter Doherty Early Career Fellowship (GTN1145748), H.J. is supported by the Sydney Medical School Foundation (University of Sydney) and an NHMRC Emerging Leadership Investigator Grant (#2017139), R.K. is supported by an NHMRC postgraduate scholarship (#2022284).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Semlitsch, T.; Stigler, F.L.; Jeitler, K.; Horvath, K.; Siebenhofer, A. Management of overweight and obesity in primary care—A systematic overview of international evidence-based guidelines. Obes. Rev. 2019, 20, 1218–1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Alman, K.L.; Lister, N.B.; Garnett, S.P.; Gow, M.L.; Aldwell, K.; Jebeile, H. Dietetic management of obesity and severe obesity in children and adolescents: A scoping review of guidelines. Obes. Rev. 2020, 22, e13132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Hampl, S.E.; Hassink, S.G.; Skinner, A.C.; Armstrong, S.C.; Barlow, S.E.; Bolling, C.F.; Avila Edwards, K.C.; Eneli, I.; Hamre, R.; Joseph, M.M.; et al. Clinical Practice Guideline for the Evaluation and Treatment of Children and Adolescents with Obesity. Pediatrics 2023, 151, e2022060640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. National Clinical Guideline Centre (UK). Identification, Assessment and Management of Overweight and Obesity in Children, Young People and Adults. (NICE Clinical Guideline 189); National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (UK): London, UK, 2014; Available online: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg189 (accessed on 12 September 2022).
  5. Lister, N.B.; Baur, L.A.; Paxton, S.J.; Jebeile, H. Contextualising Eating Disorder Concerns for Paediatric Obesity Treatment. Curr. Obes. Rep. 2021, 10, 322–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Jebeile, H.; Lister, N.; Baur, L.; Garnett, S.; Paxton, S.J. Eating disorder risk in adolescents with obesity. Obes. Rev. 2021, 22, e13173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Schaumberg, K.; Anderson, D.A.; Anderson, L.M.; Reilly, E.E.; Gorrell, S. Dietary restraint: What’s the harm? A review of the relationship between dietary restraint, weight trajectory and the development of eating pathology. Clin. Obes. 2016, 6, 89–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Available online: https://www.editcollaboration.com/ (accessed on 12 September 2022).
  9. Lister, N.B.; Baur, L.A.; Paxton, S.J.; Garnett, S.P.; Ahern, A.L.; Wilfley, D.; Maguire, S.; Sainsbury, A.; Steinbeck, K.; Braet, C.; et al. Eating Disorders in weight-related Therapy (EDIT) Collaboration: Rationale and study design. Nutr. Res. Rev. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Neumark-Sztainer, D.; Wall, M.; Guo, J.; Story, M.; Haines, J.; Eisenberg, M. Obesity, Disordered Eating, and Eating Disorders in a Longitudinal Study of Adolescents: How Do Dieters Fare 5 Years Later? J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2006, 106, 559–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Patton, G.C.; Selzer, R.; Coffey, C.; Carlin, J.B.; Wolfe, R. Onset of adolescent eating disorders: Population based cohort study over 3 years. BMJ 1999, 318, 765–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. LeBlanc, E.L.; Patnode, C.D.; Webber, E.M.; Redmond, N.; Rushkin, M.; O’Connor, E.A. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Evidence Syntheses, formerly Systematic Evidence Reviews. In Behavioral and Pharmacotherapy Weight Loss Interventions to Prevent Obesity-Related Morbidity and Mortality in Adults: An Updated Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US): Rockville, MD, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  13. Al-Khudairy, L.; Loveman, E.; Colquitt, J.L.; Mead, E.; Johnson, R.E.; Fraser, H.; Olajide, J.; Murphy, M.; Velho, R.M.; O’Malley, C. Diet, physical activity and behavioural interventions for the treatment of overweight or obese adolescents aged 12 to 17 years. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2017, 6, CD012651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ashton, L.M.; Sharkey, T.; Whatnall, M.C.; Haslam, R.L.; Bezzina, A.; Aguiar, E.J.; Collins, C.E.; Hutchesson, M.J. Which behaviour change techniques within interventions to prevent weight gain and/or initiate weight loss improve adiposity outcomes in young adults? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Obes. Rev. 2020, 21, e13009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hartmann-Boyce, J.; Johns, D.J.; Jebb, S.A.; Aveyard, P.; on behalf of the Behavioural Weight Management Review Group. Effect of behavioural techniques and delivery mode on effectiveness of weight management: Systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression. Obes. Rev. 2014, 15, 598–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Scott-Sheldon, L.A.J.; Hedges, L.V.; Cyr, C.; Young-Hyman, D.; Khan, L.K.; Magnus, M.; King, H.; Arteaga, S.; Cawley, J.; Economos, C.D.; et al. Childhood Obesity Evidence Base Project: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of a New Taxonomy of Intervention Components to Improve Weight Status in Children 2–5 Years of Age, 2005–2019. Child. Obes. 2020, 16, S2–S21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Jebeile, H.; McMaster, C.M.; Johnson, B.J.; Garnett, S.P.; Paxton, S.J.; Seidler, A.L.; Jones, R.A.; Hill, A.J.; Maguire, S.; Braet, C.; et al. Identifying Factors Which Influence Eating Disorder Risk during Behavioral Weight Management: A Consensus Study. Nutrients 2023, 15, 1085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Johnson, B.J.; Hunter, K.E.; Golley, R.K.; Chadwick, P.; Barba, A.; Aberoumand, M.; Libesman, S.; Askie, L.; Taylor, R.W.; Robledo, K.P. Unpacking the behavioural components and delivery features of early childhood obesity prevention interventions in the TOPCHILD Collaboration: A systematic review and intervention coding protocol. BMJ Open 2022, 12, e048165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Hoffmann, T.C.; Glasziou, P.P.; Boutron, I.; Milne, R.; Perera, R.; Moher, D.; Altman, D.G.; Barbour, V.; Macdonald, H.; Johnston, M. Better reporting of interventions: Template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ 2014, 348, g1687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Michie, S.; Thomas, J.; Johnston, M.; Mac Aonghusa, P.; Shawe-Taylor, J.; Kelly, M.P.; Deleris, L.A.; Finnerty, A.N.; Marques, M.M.; Norris, E. The Human Behaviour-Change Project: Harnessing the power of artificial intelligence and machine learning for evidence synthesis and interpretation. Implement. Sci. 2017, 12, 121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Tate, D.F.; Lytle, L.A.; Sherwood, N.E.; Haire-Joshu, D.; Matheson, D.; Moore, S.M.; Loria, C.M.; Pratt, C.; Ward, D.S.; Belle, S.H.; et al. Deconstructing interventions: Approaches to studying behavior change techniques across obesity interventions. Transl. Behav. Med. 2016, 6, 236–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Jebeile, H.; Lister, N.B.; Libesman, S.; Hunter, K.E.; McMaster, C.M.; Johnson, B.J.; Baur, L.A.; Paxton, S.J.; Garnett, S.P.; Ahern, A.L.; et al. Eating Disorders In weight-related Therapy (EDIT): Protocol for a systematic review with individual participant data meta-analysis of eating disorder risk in behavioural weight management. PLoS ONE 2022, in press. [Google Scholar]
  23. Samdal, G.B.; Eide, G.E.; Barth, T.; Williams, G.; Meland, E. Effective behaviour change techniques for physical activity and healthy eating in overweight and obese adults; systematic review and meta-regression analyses. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2017, 14, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Okonya, O.; Siddiqui, B.; George, D.; Fugate, C.; Hartwell, M.; Vassar, M. Use of behavioural change taxonomies in systematic reviews and meta-analyses regarding obesity management. Clin. Obes. 2023, 13, e12574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Golley, R.K.; Hendrie, G.A.; Slater, A.; Corsini, N. Interventions that involve parents to improve children’s weight-related nutrition intake and activity patterns—What nutrition and activity targets and behaviour change techniques are associated with intervention effectiveness? Obes. Rev. 2011, 12, 114–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chakraborty, D.; Bailey, B.A.; Seidler, A.L.; Yoong, S.; Hunter, K.E.; Hodder, R.K.; Webster, A.C.; Johnson, B.J. Exploring the application of behaviour change technique taxonomies in childhood obesity prevention interventions: A systematic scoping review. Prev. Med. Rep. 2022, 29, 101928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Lister, N.B.; Jebeile, H.; Khalid, R.; Seidler, A.L.; Pryde, S.; McMaster, C.M.; Hunter, K.E.; Baur, L.; Johnson, B.J. Delivery features and intervention strategies of trials in the Eating Disorders in weight-related Therapy (EDIT) Collaboration: Intervention coding protocol. 2023. Available online: https://osf.io/bzmd8/ (accessed on 10 March 2023).
  28. Lister, N.B.; Jebeile, H.; Truby, H.; Garnett, S.P.; Varady, K.A.; Cowell, C.T.; Collins, C.E.; Paxton, S.J.; Gow, M.L.; Brown, J.; et al. Fast track to health-Intermittent energy restriction in adolescents with obesity. A randomised controlled trial study protocol. Obes Res Clin Pract. 2020, 14, 80–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Salvo, V.; Kristeller, J.; Montero Marin, J.; Sanudo, A.; Lourenço, B.H.; Schveitzer, M.C.; D’Almeida, V.; Morillo, H.; Gimeno, S.G.A.; Garcia-Campayo, J.; et al. Mindfulness as a complementary intervention in the treatment of overweight and obesity in primary health care: Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2018, 19, 277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Beaulieu, K.; Casanova, N.; Oustric, P.; Turicchi, J.; Gibbons, C.; Hopkins, M.; Varady, K.; Blundell, J.; Finlayson, G. Matched Weight Loss Through Intermittent or Continuous Energy Restriction Does Not Lead To Compensatory Increases in Appetite and Eating Behavior in a Randomized Controlled Trial in Women with Overweight and Obesity. J. Nutr. 2019, 150, 623–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. DiMarco, I.D.; Klein, D.A.; Clark, V.L.; Wilson, G.T. The use of motivational interviewing techniques to enhance the efficacy of guided self-help behavioral weight loss treatment. Eat. Behav. 2009, 10, 134–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Raynor, H.A.; Niemeier, H.M.; Wing, R.R. Effect of limiting snack food variety on long-term sensory-specific satiety and monotony during obesity treatment. Eat. Behav. 2006, 7, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Epstein, L.H.; Paluch, R.A.; Saelens, B.E.; Ernst, M.M.; Wilfley, D.E. Changes in eating disorder symptoms with pediatric obesity treatment. J. Pediatr. 2001, 139, 58–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Diet Quality, Microbial Lignan Metabolites, and Cardiometabolic Health among US Adults
Previous
Association of Maternal Plasma Manganese with the Risk of Spontaneous Preterm Birth: A Nested Case–Control Study Based on the Beijing Birth Cohort Study (BBCS) in China
Next