» Articles » PMID: 12462959

Going Quasi: the Premature Disclosure Effect in a Randomized Clinical Trial

Overview
Journal J Behav Med
Specialty Social Sciences
Date 2002 Dec 5
PMID 12462959
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This paper describes a randomized clinical trial investigating a stress management program for women with breast cancer, which inadvertently turned quasi-experimental. Due to logistical considerations, group assignment was disclosed to participants (n = 63) prior to baseline assessment. Analyses of baseline measures unexpectedly revealed statistically significant differences between groups on psychological functioning. We suggest that what appears to be failed randomization may in fact point toward an important phenomenon which we have termed premature disclosure effect (PDE). A hierarchical regression model, developed to help explain the PDE, accounted for 47% of the variance. The findings indicate the importance of considering participant belief, preferences, and attributes when designing research protocols and interventions. Potential implications of PDE for clinical research in behavioral medicine are discussed and specific statistical methodologies suggested.

Citing Articles

Health promotion in individuals with mental disorders: a cluster preference randomized controlled trial.

Verhaeghe N, Clays E, Vereecken C, De Maeseneer J, Maes L, van Heeringen C BMC Public Health. 2013; 13:657.

PMID: 23855449 PMC: 3721998. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-657.


Lessons to be learned from 25 years of research investigating psychosocial interventions for cancer patients.

Moyer A, Knapp-Oliver S, Sohl S, Schnieder S, Floyd A Cancer J. 2009; 15(5):345-51.

PMID: 19826351 PMC: 3032403. DOI: 10.1097/PPO.0b013e3181bf51fb.


Preference in random assignment: implications for the interpretation of randomized trials.

Macias C, Gold P, Hargreaves W, Aronson E, Bickman L, Barreira P Adm Policy Ment Health. 2009; 36(5):331-42.

PMID: 19434489 PMC: 2796239. DOI: 10.1007/s10488-009-0224-0.

References
1.
Freidenbergs I, Gordon W, Hibbard M, Levine L, Wolf C, Diller L . Psychosocial aspects of living with cancer: a review of the literature. Int J Psychiatry Med. 1981; 11(4):303-29. DOI: 10.2190/03u9-39jh-du3g-a4bh. View

2.
Hsu L . Random sampling, randomization, and equivalence of contrasted groups in psychotherapy outcome research. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1989; 57(1):131-7. DOI: 10.1037//0022-006x.57.1.131. View

3.
Beck A, Ward C, Mendelson M, Mock J, ERBAUGH J . An inventory for measuring depression. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1961; 4:561-71. DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.1961.01710120031004. View

4.
Jensen M . Psychobiological factors predicting the course of breast cancer. J Pers. 1987; 55(2):317-42. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1987.tb00439.x. View

5.
Meyer T, Mark M . Effects of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized experiments. Health Psychol. 1995; 14(2):101-8. DOI: 10.1037//0278-6133.14.2.101. View