Optimising the validity and completion of adherence diaries: a multiple case study and randomised crossover trial

Rachael Frost, Doreen McClurg, Marian Brady, Brian Williams

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

38 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background
Diaries are the most commonly used adherence measurement method in home-based rehabilitation trials, yet their completion and validity varies widely between trials. We aimed to: (1) generate theory to explain this variation, (2) create an optimised diary and (3) evaluate the optimised diary’s validity.

Methods
Stage 1. Development: using a multiple case study approach, we collected trialist interviews (n¿=¿7), trial publications (n¿=¿16) and diaries (n¿=¿7) from seven purposively sampled UK rehabilitation trials. We explored return rates, diary designs and trialists’ ideas as to what affected diary completion and validity. Using explanatory case study analysis, we developed a diary optimisation model. Stage 2. Evaluation: we compared a diary optimised according to several model components to one nonoptimised according to the same components in a randomised AB/BA crossover trial. Healthy adults aged 60+ years without mobility impairments undertook a home-based 8-week walking programme. They recorded walking duration and frequency for 4 weeks per diary. We hypothesised that the optimised diary would possess greater validity for self-reported adherence to walking duration (criterion: the Activpal accelerometer), assessed during each diary’s final week. Participants were blinded to the hypothesis. Secondary outcomes included test-retest reliability and acceptability. Ethical approval was granted from Glasgow Caledonian University.
Original languageEnglish
JournalTrials
Volume17
Issue number489
Early online date10 Oct 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Fingerprint

Cross-Over Studies
Walking
Rehabilitation
Reproducibility of Results
Publications
Interviews

Keywords

  • adherence diaries
  • crossover trial

Cite this

@article{7f2fc03943da491da6fd053045a61d1f,
title = "Optimising the validity and completion of adherence diaries: a multiple case study and randomised crossover trial",
abstract = "BackgroundDiaries are the most commonly used adherence measurement method in home-based rehabilitation trials, yet their completion and validity varies widely between trials. We aimed to: (1) generate theory to explain this variation, (2) create an optimised diary and (3) evaluate the optimised diary’s validity.MethodsStage 1. Development: using a multiple case study approach, we collected trialist interviews (n¿=¿7), trial publications (n¿=¿16) and diaries (n¿=¿7) from seven purposively sampled UK rehabilitation trials. We explored return rates, diary designs and trialists’ ideas as to what affected diary completion and validity. Using explanatory case study analysis, we developed a diary optimisation model. Stage 2. Evaluation: we compared a diary optimised according to several model components to one nonoptimised according to the same components in a randomised AB/BA crossover trial. Healthy adults aged 60+ years without mobility impairments undertook a home-based 8-week walking programme. They recorded walking duration and frequency for 4 weeks per diary. We hypothesised that the optimised diary would possess greater validity for self-reported adherence to walking duration (criterion: the Activpal accelerometer), assessed during each diary’s final week. Participants were blinded to the hypothesis. Secondary outcomes included test-retest reliability and acceptability. Ethical approval was granted from Glasgow Caledonian University.",
keywords = "adherence diaries, crossover trial",
author = "Rachael Frost and Doreen McClurg and Marian Brady and Brian Williams",
note = "OA article Funding note: This trial was undertaken as part of Rachael Frost’s PhD. studentship, funded by Glasgow Caledonian University. Additional data processing (after activity classification by PALtechnologies proprietary software) was conducted using the HSC analysis programme, developed by Dr. Philippa Dall and Professor Malcolm Granat, School of Health, Glasgow Caledonian University. Thanks to: Dr. Danny Rafferty and the GCU SHLS for supplying the Activpals, Dr. Andrew Elders for providing statistical input, Sara Levati for carrying out randomisation and Heather Strachan for undertaking dual data extraction. Many thanks to all trialists who participated in the multiple case study",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1186/s13063-016-1615-7",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
number = "489",

}

Optimising the validity and completion of adherence diaries: a multiple case study and randomised crossover trial. / Frost, Rachael; McClurg, Doreen; Brady, Marian; Williams, Brian .

In: Trials, Vol. 17, No. 489, 2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Optimising the validity and completion of adherence diaries: a multiple case study and randomised crossover trial

AU - Frost, Rachael

AU - McClurg, Doreen

AU - Brady, Marian

AU - Williams, Brian

N1 - OA article Funding note: This trial was undertaken as part of Rachael Frost’s PhD. studentship, funded by Glasgow Caledonian University. Additional data processing (after activity classification by PALtechnologies proprietary software) was conducted using the HSC analysis programme, developed by Dr. Philippa Dall and Professor Malcolm Granat, School of Health, Glasgow Caledonian University. Thanks to: Dr. Danny Rafferty and the GCU SHLS for supplying the Activpals, Dr. Andrew Elders for providing statistical input, Sara Levati for carrying out randomisation and Heather Strachan for undertaking dual data extraction. Many thanks to all trialists who participated in the multiple case study

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - BackgroundDiaries are the most commonly used adherence measurement method in home-based rehabilitation trials, yet their completion and validity varies widely between trials. We aimed to: (1) generate theory to explain this variation, (2) create an optimised diary and (3) evaluate the optimised diary’s validity.MethodsStage 1. Development: using a multiple case study approach, we collected trialist interviews (n¿=¿7), trial publications (n¿=¿16) and diaries (n¿=¿7) from seven purposively sampled UK rehabilitation trials. We explored return rates, diary designs and trialists’ ideas as to what affected diary completion and validity. Using explanatory case study analysis, we developed a diary optimisation model. Stage 2. Evaluation: we compared a diary optimised according to several model components to one nonoptimised according to the same components in a randomised AB/BA crossover trial. Healthy adults aged 60+ years without mobility impairments undertook a home-based 8-week walking programme. They recorded walking duration and frequency for 4 weeks per diary. We hypothesised that the optimised diary would possess greater validity for self-reported adherence to walking duration (criterion: the Activpal accelerometer), assessed during each diary’s final week. Participants were blinded to the hypothesis. Secondary outcomes included test-retest reliability and acceptability. Ethical approval was granted from Glasgow Caledonian University.

AB - BackgroundDiaries are the most commonly used adherence measurement method in home-based rehabilitation trials, yet their completion and validity varies widely between trials. We aimed to: (1) generate theory to explain this variation, (2) create an optimised diary and (3) evaluate the optimised diary’s validity.MethodsStage 1. Development: using a multiple case study approach, we collected trialist interviews (n¿=¿7), trial publications (n¿=¿16) and diaries (n¿=¿7) from seven purposively sampled UK rehabilitation trials. We explored return rates, diary designs and trialists’ ideas as to what affected diary completion and validity. Using explanatory case study analysis, we developed a diary optimisation model. Stage 2. Evaluation: we compared a diary optimised according to several model components to one nonoptimised according to the same components in a randomised AB/BA crossover trial. Healthy adults aged 60+ years without mobility impairments undertook a home-based 8-week walking programme. They recorded walking duration and frequency for 4 weeks per diary. We hypothesised that the optimised diary would possess greater validity for self-reported adherence to walking duration (criterion: the Activpal accelerometer), assessed during each diary’s final week. Participants were blinded to the hypothesis. Secondary outcomes included test-retest reliability and acceptability. Ethical approval was granted from Glasgow Caledonian University.

KW - adherence diaries

KW - crossover trial

U2 - 10.1186/s13063-016-1615-7

DO - 10.1186/s13063-016-1615-7

M3 - Article

VL - 17

IS - 489

ER -