Cited by 608Advanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

A Conceptual Framework for Adaptive Preventive Interventions

Open access
Collins, Linda M., Murphy, Susan A., Bierman, Karen L.·2004·Prevention Science

Abstract

Recently, adaptive interventions have emerged as a new perspective on prevention and treatment. Adaptive interventions resemble clinical practice in that different dosages of certain prevention or treatment components are assigned to different individuals, and/or within individuals across time, with dosage varying in response to the intervention needs of individuals. To determine intervention need and thus assign dosage, adaptive interventions use prespecified decision rules based on each participant's values on key characteristics, called tailoring variables. In this paper, we offer a conceptual framework for adaptive interventions, discuss principles underlying the design and evaluation of such interventions, and review some areas where additional research is needed.

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 · 10.1023/b:prev.0000037641.26017.00

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • Adaptive treatment methodologies have been applied to interventions that adjust over weeks or months, not hours or days, but these methodologies can be applied to mobile technology interventions.

    “Adaptive treatment methodologies has been applied to interventions that adjust over the course of weeks or months, not hours or days, but these methodologies can be applied to mobile technology interventions [106].”
  • MOST has three phases: preparation, optimization, and evaluation.

    “MOST has three phases.”
  • Fractional factorial designs can make examination of multiple implementation components feasible even when cluster randomization is necessary.

    “Fractional designs can make examination of multiple components feasible, even when cluster randomization is necessary (30, 32, 37).”
  • Multiphase Optimization Strategy Implementation Trials (MOST) can be used to identify and test an optimized implementation intervention when testing all combinations in a single design is not feasible.

    “Testing all combinations in a single design is not feasible, but MOST can be used to identify and test an optimized intervention.”
  • The SMART implementation design belongs to the factorial experiment family and uses multiple randomizations, allowing a site's implementation process to be altered when it is not working.

    “The Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Implementation Trial (SMART) implementation design is a special case of the factorial experiment (32, 67, 78) involving multistage randomizations where the site-level implementation process can be modified if unsuccessful.”

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

2 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Boston, MA McGraw-Hill.
  2. Robins, J. M. (1989). The analysis of randomized and nonrandom- ized AIDS treatment trials using a new approach to causal inference in longitudinal studies. In L. Sechrest, H. Freeman, & A. Mulley (Eds.), Health service research methodology: A focus on AIDS (pp. 113-159).
  3. Robins, J. M. (1993). Information recovery and bias adjustment in proportional hazards regression analysis of randomized trials using surrogate markers. Proceedings of the Biopharmaceutical Section, American Statistical Association, 24-33.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Collins, L. M., Murphy, S. A., & Bierman, K. L.
Affiliations
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Collins, Linda M.
Venue
Prevention Science
Published
2004-09
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
185-196
ISSN
  • 1389-4986 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6695
OpenAlex
W2021206292
Cited by
608
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 34
FWCI
19.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Prevention Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH050953)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (K02DA015674, P50-DA-10075, P50DA010075, K02-DA15674)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
adaptive interventions, preventive interventions, decision rules, intervention dosage, personalized prevention, intervention design, intervention evaluation, conceptual framework
MeSH terms
Child, Child Behavior Disorders, Clinical Competence, Decision Support Techniques, Forecasting, Home Care Services, Humans, Judgment, Parent-Child Relations, Parents, Patient Care Planning, Patient Participation, Primary Prevention, Research Design, Risk Factors, Time Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Risk Assessment, Conduct Disorder, Needs Assessment

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