Risk of bias in randomized controlled trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating

Juliana Pagotto Trevizo; Phillipa Hay; Walter Swardfager; Hugo Cogo-Moreira

doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.06.006

Risk of bias in randomized controlled trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating

Juliana Pagotto Trevizo, Phillipa Hay, Walter Swardfager, Hugo Cogo-Moreira

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Purpose: In the context of Cochrane systematic reviews/meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials, risk of bias (RoB) is assessed using categorical indicators (low, unclear, or high RoB). This study sought to evaluate the indicators of the Cochrane RoB tool available for construct validity as applied to randomized clinical trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating. Methods: Bayesian confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the construct validity of the measurement model underlying the set of five categorical items, and the reliability of these indicators to measure RoB. Results: In 48 primary randomized clinical trials, the model showed good fit indices and factor loadings higher than 0.4. Conclusions: The results support the construct validity of the Cochrane RoB tool and the reliability of three of five items in this health intervention context.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	625-628.e1
Number of pages	5
Journal	Annals of Epidemiology
Volume	28
Issue number	9
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.06.006
Publication status	Published - Sept 2018

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Inc.

Keywords

anorexia nervosa
bulimia
compulsive eating
eating disorders
intervention

Access to Document

10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.06.006

Cite this

@article{3c4d1f7ca979423bb996779a51fbbce3,

title = "Risk of bias in randomized controlled trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating",

abstract = "Purpose: In the context of Cochrane systematic reviews/meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials, risk of bias (RoB) is assessed using categorical indicators (low, unclear, or high RoB). This study sought to evaluate the indicators of the Cochrane RoB tool available for construct validity as applied to randomized clinical trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating. Methods: Bayesian confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the construct validity of the measurement model underlying the set of five categorical items, and the reliability of these indicators to measure RoB. Results: In 48 primary randomized clinical trials, the model showed good fit indices and factor loadings higher than 0.4. Conclusions: The results support the construct validity of the Cochrane RoB tool and the reliability of three of five items in this health intervention context.",

keywords = "anorexia nervosa, bulimia, compulsive eating, eating disorders, intervention",

author = "Trevizo, {Juliana Pagotto} and Phillipa Hay and Walter Swardfager and Hugo Cogo-Moreira",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2018 Elsevier Inc.",

year = "2018",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.06.006",

language = "English",

volume = "28",

pages = "625--628.e1",

journal = "Annals of Epidemiology",

issn = "1047-2797",

publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Risk of bias in randomized controlled trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating

AU - Trevizo, Juliana Pagotto

AU - Hay, Phillipa

AU - Swardfager, Walter

AU - Cogo-Moreira, Hugo

PY - 2018/9

Y1 - 2018/9

N2 - Purpose: In the context of Cochrane systematic reviews/meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials, risk of bias (RoB) is assessed using categorical indicators (low, unclear, or high RoB). This study sought to evaluate the indicators of the Cochrane RoB tool available for construct validity as applied to randomized clinical trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating. Methods: Bayesian confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the construct validity of the measurement model underlying the set of five categorical items, and the reliability of these indicators to measure RoB. Results: In 48 primary randomized clinical trials, the model showed good fit indices and factor loadings higher than 0.4. Conclusions: The results support the construct validity of the Cochrane RoB tool and the reliability of three of five items in this health intervention context.

AB - Purpose: In the context of Cochrane systematic reviews/meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials, risk of bias (RoB) is assessed using categorical indicators (low, unclear, or high RoB). This study sought to evaluate the indicators of the Cochrane RoB tool available for construct validity as applied to randomized clinical trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating. Methods: Bayesian confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the construct validity of the measurement model underlying the set of five categorical items, and the reliability of these indicators to measure RoB. Results: In 48 primary randomized clinical trials, the model showed good fit indices and factor loadings higher than 0.4. Conclusions: The results support the construct validity of the Cochrane RoB tool and the reliability of three of five items in this health intervention context.

KW - anorexia nervosa

KW - bulimia

KW - compulsive eating

KW - eating disorders

KW - intervention

UR - http://handle.westernsydney.edu.au:8081/1959.7/uws:48115

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050152411&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.06.006

DO - 10.1016/j.annepidem.2018.06.006

M3 - Article

C2 - 30033037

SN - 1047-2797

VL - 28

SP - 625-628.e1

JO - Annals of Epidemiology

JF - Annals of Epidemiology

IS - 9

ER -

Risk of bias in randomized controlled trials of psychological treatments for bulimia nervosa and binge eating

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this