Sociocognitive factors associated with lifestyle intervention attrition after successful weight loss among participants with prediabetes—The PREVIEW study

Abstract

Introduction: Major risk factors for type 2 diabetes are lifestyle choices such as lack of physical activity (PA) and poor diet. Many individuals either do not take part or struggle to complete interventions supporting lifestyle changes. Demographic and theory-based sociocognitive factors associated with PREVIEW intervention attrition after successful weight loss were examined. Methods: Participants (1,856) who started the weight maintenance phase after completion of low-energy diet were retrospectively divided into three clusters depending on the point they left the trial. Discriminant analysis examined which demographic and theory-based sociocognitive variables were associated with cluster membership.Results: Most of the participants were women and well-educated. Two discriminant functions were calculated (χ 2 (24) = 247.0, p ≥ .05, d = 0.78). The demographic variables, such as age and ethnicity, and the social cognitive variable outcome expectancies on the other side were associated with cluster membership. Older age,

A systematic review of the mechanisms influencing engagement in diabetes prevention programmes for people with pre‐diabetes

“…From these, 36 studies dealt with barriers and enablers to engagement in diabetes prevention programmes 21–24,27–33,35–39,42–45,51–54,56–58,64,68,73,88,92,94,97,98,103 (Table 3), 65 studies with programme acceptability 16,24–28,33,34,37,40,41,43,44,46–50,55,57,59–63,65–72,74–87,89–93,95,96,99–109 (Table 4) and 11 reported a combination of factors and therefore included in both tables 24,27,28,33,37,43,44,57,68,92,103 . A combination of qualitative ( n = 27 16,21–46 ), cross‐sectional ( n = 13 47–59 ), cohort ( n = 9 60–68 ), RCTs ( n = 14…”

“…A combination of qualitative ( n = 27 16,21–46 ), cross‐sectional ( n = 13 47–59 ), cohort ( n = 9 60–68 ), RCTs ( n = 14 69–82 ) and quasi‐experimental ( n = 27 83–109 ) research designs were represented. The most commonly reported sample size was less than 100 participants ( n = 46 21–36,39,40,42–46,48,51,63,66,71,72,75,77–79,82,84,86–88,90–95,100,101 ) followed by 27 studies with a sample size between 100 and 500 16,37,38,41,53–56,59–62,67,69,73,76,80,81,89,97,98,102–105,107,109 . The remaining studies ( n = 17) had sample sizes greater than 500 …”

Socio-economic factors, mood, primary care utilization, and quality of life as predictors of intervention cessation and chronic stress in a type 2 diabetes prevention intervention (PREVIEW Study)

“…This result emphasized further the complexity of pathways leading to unsuccessful intervention completion [ 27 , 72 ]. As hesitancy about lifestyle changes and their necessity may hinder participation [ 24 – 26 ], participants without comorbidities requiring medication may perceive themselves at lower risk of adverse consequences from prediabetes, thus leading to a higher risk of cessation.…”

“…The question is known as “whiches conundrum” asked by King [ 23 ]: “Which intervention, for which people, under which circumstances?” While personality traits (e.g. neuroticism, extraversion) do not appear to be associated with intervention cessation in T2D-prevention [ 22 ], factors such as higher baseline body mass index (BMI), younger age, employment or study, hesitancy about the efficiency of lifestyle changes, have been associated with intervention cessation [ 16 , 24 – 29 ]. There is no consensus about the influence of factors such as low mood on intervention cessation [ 22 , 30 ].…”

Factors affecting continuous participation in follow‐up evaluations during a lifestyle intervention programme for type 2 diabetes prevention: The Feel4Diabetes‐study

“…9,10 Many participants, however, fail to complete the necessary follow-up evaluations during such interventions. [11][12][13][14] The focus of the current study was to investigate factors affecting the continuous participation of parents from families identified as high risk for T2D in follow-up evaluations during the Feel4Diabetes-study. The EU-funded Feel4Diabetes-study was a multilevel intervention aimed at promoting healthy lifestyles and preventing T2D in vulnerable populations.…”