Manuscript Details

Haines, J., Douglas, S., Mirotta, J. A., O’Kane, C., Breau, R., Walton, K., Krystia, O., Chamoun, E., Annis, A., Darlington, G. A., Buchholz, A. C., Duncan, A. M., Vallis, L. A., Spriet, L. L., Mutch, D. M., Brauer, P., Allen-Vercoe, E., Taveras, E. M., Ma, D. W. L., & the Guelph Family Health Study. (2018). Guelph Family Health Study: Pilot study of a home-based obesity prevention intervention [Study 1: Four home visits]. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 109(4), 549–560. https://doi.org/10.17269/s41997-018-0072-3

Peer Reviewed

High rating
Study reviewed under: Handbook of Procedures and Standards, Version 2
Study design characteristics contributing to rating
Design Attrition Baseline equivalence Confounding factors? Valid, reliable measures?
Cluster randomized controlled trial Low

Not assessed for randomized controlled trials with low attrition

No

Yes

Notes from the review of this manuscript

Findings for percentage of body fat, fruit and vegetable intake, consumption of sugar-sweetened beverage and juice, sleep duration, physical activity, and sedentary time received an indeterminate rating. That is because those findings had unknown attrition and HomVEE was unable to determine whether the intervention and comparison groups in the analyzed sample were equivalent at baseline on race or ethnicity and socioeconomic status. The study sample includes participants from Phase I of the Guelph Family Health Study.

Positive Parenting Practices
Outcome Measure Timing of Follow-Up Rating Direction of Effect Effect Size (Absolute Value) Stastical Significance Sample Size Sample Description
Frequency of family meals over the past week - 7 or more times 6 months after enrollment High
0.62 Not statistically significant, p= 0.66 28 families Guelph Family Health Study 4 home visits vs. control, Guelph Ontario, 2014-2016, Phase I sample
Effect rating key
Favorable finding / Statistically significant
Unfavorable finding / Statistically significant
Ambiguous finding / Statistically significant
No effect / Not statistically significant

This study included participants with the following characteristics at enrollment:

Race/Ethnicity

The race and ethnicity categories may sum to more than 100 percent if Hispanic ethnicity was reported separately or respondents could select two or more race or ethnicity categories.

White
77%
Unknown
23%

Maternal Education

Data not available

Other Characteristics

Data not available

This study included participants from the following locations:

  • State not reported or international
International Locations
Canada
Study Participants

Study families were recruited from agencies that provide services for families with young children and postings on the Ontario Early Years Centre Facebook page and the University of Guelph webpage. Families were eligible for the study if they had at least one child between 18 and 60 months and ineligible if they planned to move within the following year or did not speak English. Families were randomized to either the Guelph Family Health Study intervention (17 families) or the comparison condition (13 families). Twenty-eight families were included in the analyses in this manuscript (16 in the intervention group and 12 in the comparison group). Outcomes were measured six months after study enrollment. About 77 percent of parents were White, and about 68 percent had annual household incomes of $60,000 or more.

Setting

The study took place in Guelph, Ontario, Canada.

Intervention condition
Comparison Conditions

Families assigned to the comparison condition were not eligible to receive intervention services through the Guelph Family Health Study. Those families received monthly emails containing publicly available, general information on children’s health, such as the current Canadian physical activity guidelines.

Subgroups examined

There were no subgroups reported in this manuscript.

Author Affiliation

The study authors are affiliated with the University of Guelph, Harvard Medical School, and Massachusetts General Hospital. Authors affiliated with the University of Guelph are also the model developers.

Funding Sources

Not reported