Description and preliminary results from a structured specialist behavioural weight management group intervention:Specialist Lifestyle Management (SLiM) programme

Background -  Specialist Lifestyle Management (SLiM) is a structured patient education and self-management group weight management programme. Each session is run monthly over a 6-month period providing a less intensive long-term approach. The groups are patient-centred incorporating educational, motivational, behavioural and cognitive elements. The theoretical background, programme structure and preliminary results of SLiM are presented. Subjects/methods - The study was a pragmatic service evaluation of obese patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥35 kg/m2 with comorbidity or ≥40 kg/m2 without comorbidity referred to a specialist weight management service in the West Midlands, UK. 828 patients were enrolled within SLiM over a 48-month period. Trained facilitators delivered the programme. Preliminary anonymised data were analysed using the intention-to-treat principle. The primary outcome measure was weight loss at 3 and 6 months with comparisons between completers and non-completers performed. The last observation carried forward was used for missing data. Results - Of the 828 enrolled within SLiM, 464 completed the programme (56%). The mean baseline weight was 135 kg (BMI=49.1 kg/m2) with 87.2% of patients having a BMI≥40 kg/m2 and 12.4% with BMI≥60 kg/m2. The mean weight change of all patients enrolled was −4.1 kg (95% CI −3.6 to −4.6 kg, p=0.0001) at the end of SLiM, with completers (n=464) achieving −5.5 kg (95% CI −4.2 to −6.2 kg, p=0.0001) and non-completers achieving −2.3 kg (p=0.0001). The majority (78.6%) who attended the 6-month programme achieved weight loss with 32.3% achieving a ≥5% weight loss. Conclusions - The SLiM programme is an effective group intervention for the management of severe and complex obesity

Expectancy of success, subjective task-value, and message frame in the appraisal of value-promoting messages made prior to a high-stakes examination

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht Previous research has examined how subjective task-value and expectancy of success influence the appraisal of value-promoting messages used by teachers prior to high-stakes examinations. The aim of this study was to examine whether message-frame (gain or loss-framed messages) also influences the appraisal of value-promoting messages. Two hundred and fifty-two participants in Years 12 and 13 read vignettes of fictional students who were high or low in subjective-task value, and expectancy of success, and asked to imagine how that student would appraise either a gain or loss-framed message. A challenge appraisal followed vignettes with high subjective task-value and high expectancy of success whereas a threat appraisal followed vignettes with high subjective task-value and low expectancy of success. A loss-framed message resulted in a stronger threat appraisal, and a gain-framed message in a greater disregarding appraisal for the vignette with high subjective task-value and high expectancy of success. Value-promoting messages can be appraised in different ways depending on combinations of intrapersonal (subjective task-value and expectancy of success) and interpersonal (message-frame) influences. © 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrech

Voor eigen parochie passie preken : over provincialisme in wetenschap en onderzoek

Contains fulltext : 30007.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)With bibliogr. and a summary in English, valedictory address Radboud University Nijmegen32 p

What difference does a frame make? Potential moderators of framing effects and the role of self-efficacy

Contains fulltext : 134952.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Health-promoting communications usually stress the value of healthy behaviour, but they can do this in many ways. In particular, the message can be framed in terms of the benefits of performing the behaviour (gain frame – e.g., ´quitting smoking is healthy´) or in terms of the costs of failing to perform the behaviour (loss frame – e.g., ´continuing to smoke is unhealthy´). Unfortunately, studies show inconsistent results with regard to which type of framing is more persuasive. The results of several studies have suggested that gain-framed information is more persuasive than loss-framed information, the results of other studies have suggested that loss-framed information is more persuasive and some studies have reported no differential effects (for meta-analyses see O'Keefe & Jensen, 2006; 2007). To account for these inconsistent findings, many researchers have been concerned with identifying possible moderating variables of message framing effects.4 p