Cited by 1,176Behavioral Health and InterventionsHealth Policy Implementation ScienceBehavioral and Psychological Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 20 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

From ideas to efficacy: The ORBIT model for developing behavioral treatments for chronic diseases

Open access

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Given the critical role of behavior in preventing and treating chronic diseases, it is important to accelerate the development of behavioral treatments that can improve chronic disease prevention and outcomes. Findings from basic behavioral and social sciences research hold great promise for addressing behaviorally based clinical health problems, yet there is currently no established pathway for translating fundamental behavioral science discoveries into health-related treatments ready for Phase III efficacy testing. This article provides a systematic framework for developing behavioral treatments for preventing and treating chronic diseases. METHOD: The Obesity-Related Behavioral Intervention Trials (ORBIT) model for behavioral treatment development features a flexible and progressive process, prespecified clinically significant milestones for forward movement, and return to earlier stages for refinement and optimization. RESULTS: This article presents the background and rationale for the ORBIT model, a summary of key questions for each phase, a selection of study designs and methodologies well-suited to answering these questions, and prespecified milestones for forward or backward movement across phases. CONCLUSIONS: The ORBIT model provides a progressive, clinically relevant approach to increasing the number of evidence-based behavioral treatments available to prevent and treat chronic diseases. (PsycINFO Database Record

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/hea0000161

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 20 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 15 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 17
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 9
21 of 21
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Applying bench findings to the bedside (Translation I research) is rare in behavioral science.

    “Translation I research in which “bench” findings are applied to the “bedside” is uncommon in the behavioral arena.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Knowledge about fundamental human processes is not being optimally used for pressing behavioral health problems.

    “Advances in understanding fundamental human processes such as motivation, emotion, cognition, self-regulation, decision-making, stress, and social networks are not being optimally applied to pressing behavioral health problems.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Promising behavioral treatments in development are often abandoned instead of refined when they fail early tests.

    “Promising behavioral treatments “in the pipeline” are often abandoned, rather than refined, if they fail early tests.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Some treatments that succeed in early studies are not advanced to Phase III efficacy trials, while others enter Phase III prematurely without sufficient early-phase development.

    “In some cases, treatments that achieve success in early studies are not pushed toward rigorous testing in Phase III efficacy trials, while others are tested in Phase III trials prematurely, without undergoing adequate development and refinement in early-phase studies.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Behavioral treatments for physical health outcomes lack governmental regulation and a widely accepted development process.

    “Since the development of behavioral treatments that target physical health outcomes has not been regulated by any governmental agency, it has not been guided by any widely recognized and agreed-upon process.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    No established pathway currently exists to translate basic behavioral science discoveries into treatments ready for Phase III efficacy testing.

    “Findings from basic behavioral and social science research hold great promise for addressing behaviorally-based clinical health problems, yet there is currently no established pathway for translating fundamental behavioral science discoveries into health-related treatments ready for Phase III efficacy testing.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Research efficiency and quality are enhanced when a collaborative team of investigators integrates diverse studies into a chain of evidence justifying a Phase III trial.

    “An essential assumption of the ORBIT model is that research efficiency and quality are enhanced when a collaborative team of investigators works to integrate diverse studies into a chain of evidence that justifies a Phase III trial.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Few validated lifestyle interventions are available for insulin resistant patients.

    “Clinical guidelines promote lifestyle change as the first step in treatment of insulin resistant patients (Handelsman, Mechanick, Blonde, Gruberger, Bloomgarden, Bray, Dagogo-Jack, Davidson, et al., 2011), but few validated lifestyle interventions are available.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    All elements needed to go from ideas to an efficacy trial currently exist, but the pathway for doing so is not well-defined.

    “Currently, all of the elements needed to go from ideas to the efficacy trial exist, but the pathway for doing so is not well-defined.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most behavioral treatments are currently tested using randomized designs with attention control groups, fixed protocols, and blinding to outcomes until follow-up is complete.

    “Currently, most behavioral treatments are tested in the same way using randomized designs with attention control groups, fixed protocols, and blinding to outcomes until follow-up is complete.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Demand is growing for primary and secondary prevention strategies that can reduce the burden of costly chronic diseases which primarily have behavioral causes.

    “Currently, a window of opportunity exists in which demand is growing for primary and secondary prevention strategies that can reduce the burden of costly chronic diseases which primarily have behavioral causes.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Small early phase studies run the risk of being judged not very important.

    “Small, early phase studies run the risk of being judged to be not very important.”
12 of 12

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.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Intervention Mapping citation adds an author absent from the reference

    Minor

    The in-text citation includes Fernandez, but the matching 2011 reference lists only Bartholomew, Parcel, Kok, and Gottlieb.

  • Davidson citation has conflicting years

    Minor

    The text cites this Davidson work as published in 2002, while the corresponding reference lists 2003.

  • ORBIT initiative citation has conflicting years

    Minor

    The in-text citation dates the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research initiative to 2010, but its reference-list entry is dated 2011.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Friedman LM Furberg CD DeMets DL 1998 Fundamentals of Clinical Trials 3 New York Springer-Verlag
  2. Wansink B 2010 Designing Interventions that Stick: Behavioral Event Monitoring Presented at NIH Workshop on “Translating Ideas into Interventions: The Process of Developing Behavorial Interventions December 6–7, 2010 Bethesda, MD Available at http://www.nihorbit.org/ORBIT%20Content/Workshops%20and%20Conferences.aspx?PageView=Shared

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1,176

Metadata

Authors
Czajkowski, S. M., Powell, L. H., Adler, N., Naar-King, S., Reynolds, K. D., Hunter, C. M., Laraia, B., Olster, D. H., Perna, F. M., Peterson, J. C., Epel, E., Boyington, J. E., & Charlson, M. E.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Claremont Graduate University (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
Venue
Health Psychology
Published
2015-10
Volume
34
Issue
10
Pages
971-982
ISSN
  • 0278-6133 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-7810
OpenAlex
W1985326609
Cited by
1,161
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 118 · 2025: 152 · 2024: 158 · 2023: 142 · 2022: 116 · 2021: 119 · 2020: 191 · 2019: 69 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 4
FWCI
50.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Psychology (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Scholarship @ Claremont (The Claremont Colleges) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging
  • American Federation for Aging Research
  • John A. Hartford Foundation
  • Atlantic Philanthropies (K23AG042869)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Keywords
ORBIT model, chronic disease prevention, chronic disease treatment
MeSH terms
Behavior Therapy, Chronic Disease, Humans, Biomedical Research

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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