Cited by 119Optimal Experimental Design MethodsHealth Policy Implementation ScienceBehavioral Health and Interventions

Evaluating individual intervention components: Making decisions based on the results of a factorial screening experiment

Open access
Collins, Linda M, Trail, Jessica B, Kugler, Kari C, Baker, Timothy B, Piper, Megan E, Mermelstein, Robin J·2014·Translational Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

The multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) is a framework for not only evaluating but also optimizing behavioral interventions. A tool critical for MOST is the screening experiment, which enables efficient gathering of information for deciding which components to include in an optimized intervention. This article outlines a procedure for making decisions based on data from a factorial screening experiment. The decision making procedure is illustrated with artificial data generated to resemble empirical data. The illustration suggests that this approach is useful for selecting intervention components and settings based on the results of a factorial screening experiment. It is important to develop methods for making decisions based on factorial screening experiments. The approach demonstrated here is potentially useful, but has limited generalizability. Future research should develop additional decision making procedures for a variety of situations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s13142-013-0239-7

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Collins, L. M., Trail, J. B., Kugler, K. C., Baker, T. B., Piper, M. E., & Mermelstein, R. J.
Affiliations
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Corresponding author
Collins, Linda M
Venue
Translational Behavioral Medicine
Published
2013-11-26
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
238-251
ISSN
  • 1613-9860 (ISSN-L)
  • 1869-6716
OpenAlex
W2039433490
Cited by
119
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 1
FWCI
6.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Translational Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (P50DA010075)
  • National Cancer Institute (P50CA143188, P50CA143188-3, P01CA180945)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Optimal Experimental Design Methods
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
multiphase optimization strategy, decision-making, intervention settings, artificial data

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review