Adaptive intervention for prevention of adolescent suicidal behavior after hospitalization: a pilot sequential multiple assignment randomized trial

Author(s):  
Ewa K. Czyz ◽  
Cheryl A. King ◽  
David Prouty ◽  
Valerie J. Micol ◽  
Maureen Walton ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Nancy E Sherwood ◽  
A Lauren Crain ◽  
Elisabeth M Seburg ◽  
Meghan L Butryn ◽  
Evan M Forman ◽  
...  

Abstract Background State-of-the-art behavioral weight loss treatment (SBT) can lead to clinically meaningful weight loss, but only 30–60% achieve this goal. Developing adaptive interventions that change based on individual progress could increase the number of people who benefit. Purpose Conduct a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) to determine the optimal time to identify SBT suboptimal responders and whether it is better to switch to portion-controlled meals (PCM) or acceptance-based treatment (ABT). Method The BestFIT trial enrolled 468 adults with obesity who started SBT and were randomized to treatment response assessment at Session 3 (Early TRA) or 7 (Late TRA). Suboptimal responders were re-randomized to PCM or ABT. Responders continued SBT. Primary outcomes were weight change at 6 and 18 months. Results PCM participants lost more weight at 6 months (−18.4 lbs, 95% CI −20.5, −16.2) than ABT participants (−15.7 lbs, 95% CI: −18.0, −13.4), but this difference was not statistically significant (−2.7 lbs, 95% CI: −5.8, 0.5, p = .09). PCM and ABT participant 18 month weight loss did not differ. Early and Late TRA participants had similar weight losses (p = .96), however, Early TRA PCM participants lost more weight than Late TRA PCM participants (p = .03). Conclusions Results suggest adaptive intervention sequences that warrant further research (e.g., identify suboptimal responders at Session 3, use PCMs as second-stage treatment). Utilizing the SMART methodology to develop an adaptive weight loss intervention that would outperform gold standard SBT in a randomized controlled trial is an important next step, but may require additional optimization work. Clinical Trial information ClinicalTrials.gov identifier; NCT02368002


Trials ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria do Socorro Morais Pereira Simões ◽  
Bárbara de Barros Gonze ◽  
Neli Leite Proença ◽  
Vinicius Tonon Lauria ◽  
Vinícius Demarchi Silva Terra ◽  
...  

Abstract Background There is scientific evidence suggesting that app-based interventions targeted to increase the level of physical activity might be effective, although multicomponent interventions appear to be more effective than app-based interventions alone. Despite the motivating results, it remains unclear whether or not app-based interventions can increase the level of physical activity and cardiovascular health. Our study aims to investigate the effect of a smartphone app combined with gamification on the level of physical activity of adults and older adults. The specific aims are (1) to verify the effects of the intervention on cardiometabolic and cardiovascular health, lung function, and cardiorespiratory fitness; and (2) to verify the relationship between age group and the response rate. Methods/design We will conduct a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART). The adaptive intervention protocol will last 6 months. After baseline assessments, participants will be randomized into one of three groups (group 1: app + tailored messages; group 2: app + tailored messages + gamification I; control group: physical activity counseling). For 12 weeks, we will record the average number of steps per day of participants from groups 1 and 2. At 6 weeks from initiation of recording, participants will be classified into responders and non-responders according to their increase in the average number of daily steps; all those considered as non-responders will be re-randomized, with the chance to participate in a third group – group 3: app + tailored messages + gamification II. Finally, at 12 weeks, participants will continue using the app but will no longer receive direct intervention from investigators. All participants will be reassessed at 3 and 6 months from baseline. Our pilot SMART will require 42 participants (14 per arm). Following the SMART pilot, we will calculate the sample size for the trial based on the variation of the average number of steps/day, including an up to 40% loss to follow-up and a less optimistic nonresponse rate of 65%. Discussion To our knowledge, this will be the first trial with adaptive intervention to test the effectiveness of using a smartphone app to increase the level of physical activity of adults and older adults. Trial registration Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry: RBR-8xtc9c. Registered on 3 August 2018, http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br; UTN number: U1111–1218-1092.


AERA Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 233285841987270 ◽  
Author(s):  
James S. Kim ◽  
Catherine A. Asher ◽  
Mary Burkhauser ◽  
Laura Mesite ◽  
Diana Leyva

This study employs a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design to develop an adaptive intervention with personalized print and digital content for kindergarten to Grade 2 children (n = 273). In Stage 1, we ask whether it is better for children to receive an adaptive intervention based on (a) 10 conceptually coherent texts or (b) 10 leveled texts on a range of topics. In Stage 2, we ask how best to encourage nonresponding children. Findings indicate that children who received either conceptually coherent texts or leveled texts performed similarly on reading comprehension posttests, while augmenting and intensifying follow-up with gamification of the app and text messages to parents improved comprehension outcomes for nonresponders. Descriptively, we find that only 26% (n = 71) of parents accessed the app, highlighting the need for better implementation procedures to increase take up of app-based digital activities.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley S. Peterson ◽  
Amy E. West ◽  
John R. Weisz ◽  
Wendy J. Mack ◽  
Michele D. Kipke ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Treatment of a child who has an anxiety disorder usually begins with the question of which treatment to start first, medication or psychotherapy. Both have strong empirical support, but few studies have compared their effectiveness head-to-head, and none has investigated what to do if the treatment tried first isn’t working well—whether to optimize the treatment already begun or to add the other treatment. Methods This is a single-blind Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) of 24 weeks duration with two levels of randomization, one in each of two 12-week stages. In Stage 1, children will be randomized to fluoxetine or Coping Cat Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). In Stage 2, remitters will continue maintenance-level therapy with the single-modality treatment received in Stage 1. Non-remitters during the first 12 weeks of treatment will be randomized to either [1] optimization of their Stage 1 treatment, or [2] optimization of Stage 1 treatment and addition of the other intervention. After the 24-week trial, we will follow participants during open, naturalistic treatment to assess the durability of study treatment effects. Patients, 8–17 years of age who are diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, will be recruited and treated within 9 large clinical sites throughout greater Los Angeles. They will be predominantly underserved, ethnic minorities. The primary outcome measure will be the self-report score on the 41-item youth SCARED (Screen for Child Anxiety Related Disorders). An intent-to-treat analysis will compare youth randomized to fluoxetine first versus those randomized to CBT first (“Main Effect 1”). Then, among Stage 1 non-remitters, we will compare non-remitters randomized to optimization of their Stage 1 monotherapy versus non-remitters randomized to combination treatment (“Main Effect 2”). The interaction of these main effects will assess whether one of the 4 treatment sequences (CBT➔CBT; CBT➔med; med➔med; med➔CBT) in non-remitters is significantly better or worse than predicted from main effects alone. Discussion Findings from this SMART study will identify treatment sequences that optimize outcomes in ethnically diverse pediatric patients from underserved low- and middle-income households who have anxiety disorders. Trial registration This protocol, version 1.0, was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on February 17, 2021 with Identifier: NCT04760275.


2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 286-293
Author(s):  
Jonathan C Hibbard ◽  
Jonathan S Friedstat ◽  
Sonia M Thomas ◽  
Renee E Edkins ◽  
C Scott Hultman ◽  
...  

Background/aims: Laser treatment of burns scars is considered by some providers to be standard of care. However, there is little evidence-based research as to the true benefit. A number of factors hinder evaluation of the benefit of laser treatment. These include significant heterogeneity in patient response and possible delayed effects from the laser treatment. Moreover, laser treatments are often provided sequentially using different types of equipment and settings, so there are effectively a large number of overall treatment options that need to be compared. We propose a trial capable of coping with these issues and that also attempts to take advantage of the heterogeneous response in order to estimate optimal treatment plans personalized to each individual patient. It will be the first large-scale randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of laser treatments for burns scars and, to our knowledge, the very first example of the utility of a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial in plastic surgery. Methods: We propose using a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial design to investigate the effect of various permutations of laser treatment on hypertrophic burn scars. We will compare and test hypotheses regarding laser treatment effects at a general population level. Simultaneously, we hope to use the data generated to discover possible beneficial personalized treatment plans, tailored to individual patient characteristics. Results: We show that the proposed trial has good power to detect laser treatment effect at the overall population level, despite comparing a large number of treatment combinations. The trial will simultaneously provide high-quality data appropriate for estimating precision-medicine treatment rules. We detail population-level comparisons of interest and corresponding sample size calculations. We provide simulations to suggest the power of the trial to detect laser effect and also the possible benefits of personalization of laser treatment to individual characteristics. Conclusion: We propose, to our knowledge, the first use of a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial in surgery. The trial is rigorously designed so that it is reasonably straightforward to implement and powered to answer general overall questions of interest. The trial is also designed to provide data that are suitable for the estimation of beneficial precision-medicine treatment rules that depend both on individual patient characteristics and on-going real-time patient response to treatment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 267-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason C. Chow ◽  
Lauren H. Hampton

Interventions often require multiple decisions to improve outcomes for every student. Whether the decision to implement a practice, tailor an existing protocol, or change approaches, these decisions should be based on individual variables and outcomes via a sequence of treatment. To develop adaptive interventions that have sufficient evidence to support decisions, components, and sequences, they must be evaluated as they operate. The sequential multiple-assignment randomized trial is a design that experimentally assesses the efficacy of the decisions, components, and sequence of an adaptive intervention. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of this novel methodology and describe how this design can provide meaningful information about components and sequence based on individual differences and response to maximize educational outcomes in special education.


2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 1572-1589 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy NeCamp ◽  
Amy Kilbourne ◽  
Daniel Almirall

Cluster-level dynamic treatment regimens can be used to guide sequential treatment decision-making at the cluster level in order to improve outcomes at the individual or patient-level. In a cluster-level dynamic treatment regimen, the treatment is potentially adapted and re-adapted over time based on changes in the cluster that could be impacted by prior intervention, including aggregate measures of the individuals or patients that compose it. Cluster-randomized sequential multiple assignment randomized trials can be used to answer multiple open questions preventing scientists from developing high-quality cluster-level dynamic treatment regimens. In a cluster-randomized sequential multiple assignment randomized trial, sequential randomizations occur at the cluster level and outcomes are observed at the individual level. This manuscript makes two contributions to the design and analysis of cluster-randomized sequential multiple assignment randomized trials. First, a weighted least squares regression approach is proposed for comparing the mean of a patient-level outcome between the cluster-level dynamic treatment regimens embedded in a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial. The regression approach facilitates the use of baseline covariates which is often critical in the analysis of cluster-level trials. Second, sample size calculators are derived for two common cluster-randomized sequential multiple assignment randomized trial designs for use when the primary aim is a between-dynamic treatment regimen comparison of the mean of a continuous patient-level outcome. The methods are motivated by the Adaptive Implementation of Effective Programs Trial which is, to our knowledge, the first-ever cluster-randomized sequential multiple assignment randomized trial in psychiatry.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document