Mihas 2010.
Methods |
Study design: RCT. Study grouping: parallel. Allocation ratio in RCTs: 1:1. Analyses methods for RCTs: available‐case analysis; end values. Description of randomisation: from 286 finally eligible students, 218 were assigned randomly using a computerised random number generator to participate in the study in 2 groups of 109 students (intervention group and control group). How were missing data handled? Over 12 months, 11 participants lost in intervention group and 16 in control group. Data analysed based on participants having full data at end of follow‐up (98/109 randomised in intervention group; 93/109 randomised in control group). Number of study contacts: 3. Period of follow‐up (from when duration of active intervention period ended): 14 months. Periods of recruitment: NR. Intervention took place between September 2007 and January 2008. Sample size justification adequately described? Was based on previously reported intervention changes in energy intake among children. To detect standardised differences > 5% in dietary intake (main dependent variable) between study groups before and after intervention, achieving 90% statistical power at a probability level < 0.05, 87 participants should be recruited in each study group. To counter potential low response and dropouts, the authors increased this number by 25% to 109 for each study group. Sampling method: 342 adolescents of 5 high schools located in Vyronas district were initially eligible. 309/342 students voluntarily were interested in participating in study. Study objective: to evaluate short‐term (15‐day) and long‐term (12‐month) effects of a 12‐week school‐based health and nutrition interventional programme regarding energy and nutrient intake, dietary changes and BMI. Study population: students aged 12‐13 years (7th grade). |
|
Participants |
Baseline characteristics (reported for 2 groups and overall) Lower fat intake (≤ 30%TE)
Usual or modified fat intake
Overall
Included criteria: children aged 12‐13 years at high schools located in Vyronas district, Athens, Greece. Excluded criteria: organic cause for high or low weight, received any medication that might interfere with growth or weight control, or were on specific diets. Pretreatment: no significant differences in age, gender, BMI, overweight/obesity, smoking, screen time, weekly hours of sport activities, weekly hours of playing or walking, and weekly hours of hobbies between groups before the nutrition intervention. Brief description of participants: 12‐ to 13‐year‐old adolescents from Greece; CVD risk: very few children were regular smokers. Total number completed RCT: 98 in intervention group; 93 in control group. Total number randomised: 218. |
|
Interventions |
Intervention characteristics Lower fat intake (≤ 30%TE)
Usual or modified fat intake
|
|
Outcomes |
BMI
Energy intake
Fat intake
Saturated fat intake
Protein intake
CHO intake
|
|
Identification |
Sponsorship source: Ministry of Education and the National Foundation for the Youth. Country: Greece. Setting: high schools, Vyronas district, Athens. Comments: NA. Author's name: Constantinos Mihas. Institution: Department of Internal Medicine, General Hospital of Kimi 'G. Papanikolaou,' Kimi, Evia, 34003 Greece. Email: gas521@yahoo.co.uk. Declaration of interests: yes; conflicts of Interest: none declared. Study ID: Vyronas 2009. Type of record: journal article. |
|
Notes | ||
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Computerised random number generator used; baseline characteristics similar between groups. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | NR. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Authors stated blinding not feasible, but primary outcome not likely to be influenced by lack of blinding. |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Authors stated that blinding was not feasible, but assessment of primary outcome not likely influenced by lack of blinding. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Similar in both groups, paper mentioned loss of 5 participants during trial (due to health problems, lack of interest and move to other schools). Of 109 allocated in each group, 10 in intervention group and 12 in the control group were not analysed (reasons unclear). 10% (22/213) lost over 17 months. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Protocol not available, but prespecified outcomes in methods reported in results section. |
Other bias | Unclear risk | Limited information on control group diet prescription, unable to judge if prescribed diets being compared differed in components other than total fat. |