↓ Skip to main content

Protocol for a randomized controlled trial testing the impact of feedback on familial risk of chronic diseases on family-level intentions to participate in preventive lifestyle behaviors

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
356 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Protocol for a randomized controlled trial testing the impact of feedback on familial risk of chronic diseases on family-level intentions to participate in preventive lifestyle behaviors
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3623-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlene J. Wilson, Kayla de la Haye, John Coveney, Donna L. Hughes, Amanda Hutchinson, Caroline Miller, Ivanka Prichard, Paul Ward, Laura M. Koehly

Abstract

Common disease risk clusters in families due to shared genetics, exposure to environmental risk factors, and because many health behaviours are established and maintained in family environments. This randomised controlled trial will test whether the provision of a family health history (FHH) risk assessment tool increases intentions and engagement in health behaviors. Message distribution and collective behavior change within family networks will be mapped using social network analysis. The relative intervention impact will be compared between families from different ethnic backgrounds. One hundred and fifty mothers (50 Anglo-Australian, 50 Italian-Australian, 50 Vietnamese-Australian) will be recruited, with four or more other family members across three generations, including a child (aged 10-18 years). Each family is randomly assigned to intervention or control. At baseline and 6-month follow-up, all participants complete surveys to assess dietary and physical activity intentions and behaviors, attitudes towards food, and perceived disease risk. Intervention families receive a visual pedigree detailing their FHH of diabetes, heart disease, breast and bowel cancer, a health education workbook to ascertain members' disease risk (i.e. average or above average risk), and screening and primary prevention recommendations. After completion of follow-up assessments, controls will receive their pedigree and workbook. The primary hypothesis is that attitudes and lifestyle behaviors will improve more within families exposed to FHH feedback, although the extent of this improvement may vary between families from different ethnic backgrounds. Additionally, the extent of improvement in the treatment group will be moderated by the level of family disease risk, with above-average risk leading to greater improvement. A secondary aim will explore different family members' roles in message distribution and collective responses to risk using social network approaches and to compare network functioning between families with different ethnic backgrounds. Results will guide future health promotion programs aimed at improving lifestyle factors. This research will assess whether FHH can motivate families to adopt family-level strategies to support health promoting behaviors. Secondary analyses aim to identify change agents within the family who are particularly effective in shifting normative behaviors. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613001033730 . Retrospectively registered: 17 September, 2013.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 356 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 355 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 48 13%
Student > Bachelor 40 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 9%
Researcher 21 6%
Unspecified 16 4%
Other 74 21%
Unknown 124 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 54 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 48 13%
Sports and Recreations 26 7%
Psychology 25 7%
Social Sciences 22 6%
Other 50 14%
Unknown 131 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 September 2016.
All research outputs
#20,341,859
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#13,947
of 14,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#279,630
of 322,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#329
of 347 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,146 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 347 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.