The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Differential attrition in health behaviour change trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: Attrition is a common problem in health behaviour change (HBC) trials. When the degree of attrition differs between treatment conditions, then this is called differential attrition and is regarded as a major threat to internal validity. The primary research question of this study was: how often and to what degree does differential attrition occur in HBC trials? DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis of a random selection of HBC trials (k = 60). We meta-analysed the relative attrition rates using a random-effects model and examined the relationship between the relative attrition rates and the potential moderators: the amount of human contact in delivery and the intensity of the intervention/control condition, the type of control condition, and the follow-up intensity and duration. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative attrition rates. RESULTS: The average attrition rate was 18% (SD = .15; M = .15) in the intervention and 17% (SD = .13; M = .13) in the control conditions. The estimated average relative attrition rate was 1.10 (95% CI: 1.01-1.20, p = .02), suggesting an overall higher attrition rate of 10% in the intervention conditions. This relative attrition rate was not related to any of the potential moderators. CONCLUSION: There is indication of a slightly higher amount of attrition on average in the intervention conditions of HBC trials.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,817
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
(2002) · Cited by 13,211
Journal of The American Statistical Association
Fienberg, S. E. (2004) · Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences · doi:10.1002/0471667196.ess1317 · Cited by 6,289
The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis
(2019) · doi:10.7758/9781610448864 · Cited by 4,553
A Nonparametric “Trim and Fill” Method of Accounting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.2000.10473905 · Cited by 2,955
Outlier and influence diagnostics for meta-analysis
Viechtbauer, W., & Cheung, M. W.-L. (2010) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.11 · Cited by 2,949
Self-citationPeters, J. L., Sutton, A. J., Jones, D. R., Abrams, K. R., & Rushton, L. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.010 · Cited by 2,053
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- 10.1002/14651858.CD002795.pub2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/jrsm.v1:2 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–132 of 132
Schumacher, L. T., Crutzen, R., Kwah, K., Brown, K., Bailey, J., Bremner, S. A., Jackson, L. J., & Newby, K. V. (2025) · PLOS Digital Health · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000875 · Cited by 2
Metse, A. P., Stockings, E., Bailey, J. M., Regan, T., Bartlem, K. M., Wolfenden, L., Taylor, G. M. J., Wiggers, J. H., & Bowman, J. (2019) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030646 · Cited by 2
Rahimi‐Ardabili, H., Reynolds, R. C., Zwar, N. A., Briggs, N., & Vartanian, L. R. (2023) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2023.04.18.23288716 · Cited by 2
McChrystal, R., Hanlon, P., Lees, J. S., Phillippo, D., Welton, N. J., Gillies, K., & McAllister, D. (2025) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111971 · Cited by 1
Smallwood, N., Pascoe, A., Goh, N. S. L., Zappino, S., Vogrin, S., Ly, L., Buchan, C., Spathis, A., & Philip, J. A. M. (2026) · Respirology · doi:10.1002/resp.70281 · Cited by 1
Burton, A. E., & Elliott, J. M. (2022) · The Arts in Psychotherapy · doi:10.1016/j.aip.2022.101990 · Cited by 1
“There was no differential attrition between intervention conditions which would have posed a major threat to validity (Crutzen et al., 2015).”
BackgroundSiemer, L., Pieterse, M. E., Allouch, S. B., Postel, M. G., & Brusse-Keizer, M. G. J. (2023) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/47040 · Cited by 2
“However, the most critical aspect is whether these predictors of attrition varied between the 2 treatment conditions [52].”
Davidson, C. A., Shillington, K. J., Irwin, J. D., & Mantler, T. (2024) · Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/casp.70030 · Cited by 1
Newby, K. V., Kwah, K., Schumacher, L. T., Crutzen, R., Jackson, L., Bremner, S. A., Bailey, J., & Brown, K. (2025) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/71611 · Cited by 1
“This was unexpected given that meta-analyses of behavior change interventions, including for HIV prevention, have on average found retention to be slightly higher in the control group than in the intervention group [38,39].”
Ethical Considerations in Health Psychology
Crutzen, R. (2025) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781529674750.n10 · Cited by 1
Scott, A. J., Rowse, G., & Webb, T. L. (2020) · Health Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.5334/hpb.6 · Cited by 1
Kim, H., & Nah, E. (2015) · 보건교육·건강증진학회지 · doi:10.14367/kjhep.2015.32.4.37
“한편, 참여자의 중도탈락은 표본의 크기와 검정력을 감소시키고, 참여자들 간의 변이에 영향을 줌으 로써 통계적 타당성에도 부정적 영향을 주게 된다(Crutzen et al., 2015).”
Het ontwikkelen en evalueren van het online zelfmanagementprogramma ‘Reuma zelf te lijf ’
Zuidema, R. (2021) · Verpleegkunde · doi:10.24078/vpg.2021.3.126593
Kee, D. P., O’Conor, R. M., Wisnivesky, J. P., Wolf, M. S., & Federman, A. D. (2021) · Journal of Asthma · doi:10.1080/02770903.2021.1941090
“risk of bias (7,8) and diminished statistical power (9).”
BackgroundGnambs, T., & Schroeders, U. (2022) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/hte6z
Pearson, J., Coggins, J., Derham, S., Russell, J., Walsh, N. E., Lenguerrand, E., Palmer, S., & Cramp, F. L. (2021) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-788009/v1
Reinwand, D. A. (2016) · Research Publications (Maastricht University) · doi:10.26481/dis.20161221dr
Jander, A. (2016) · Research Publications (Maastricht University) · doi:10.26481/dis.20160121aj · Cited by 1
Akers, L. G., Andrews, J. A., Severson, H. H., & Gordon, J. S. (2018) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/stmwv
Nieto, I., & Vázquez, C. (2020) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/auhm6
Pirotta, S., Barker, A. L., Morello, R., Rosenich, E., Perin, S., Araugo, S. D., Lim, Y. Y., & Ayton, D. (2025) · Australian Journal on Ageing · doi:10.1111/ajag.70005
MacKenzie, N. E., Rana, R., Isaac, L., Tyrrell, J., & Ruskin, D. A. (2025) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare13131527 · Cited by 1
“Indeed, attrition rates are a common challenge in child health and behaviour change research, typically near 20% [53,54]; however, additional factors such as surgery dates and competing priorities during planning for surgery may have elevated the present attrition rates.”
Aperribai, L., Moreno, G., Sarrionandia, A., & Salaberría, K. (2025) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1699593
Newby, K. V., Kwah, K., Schumacher, L. T., Crutzen, R., Bailey, J., Jackson, L., Bremner, S. A., & Brown, K. (2024) · Public Health Research · doi:10.3310/lkot7404
Pallin, N. D., Algeo, N., O'Connor, M. E., Connolly, H., Lowry, M., Bennett, K., Gillespie, P. H., Hobbins, A. P., Gallagher, P., Mullen, L., et al. (2025) · Contemporary Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/j.cct.2025.108185
Leysen, D., Wurhofer, D., Höppchen, I., Bamberger, E. M., Breda, A., Carrozzo, E., Crutzen, R., Danner, R., Duca, I., Grote, V., et al. (2025) · doi:10.2196/preprints.90203
Janssen, E., Philippens, N., Bruinsma, J., Kremers, S., & Crutzen, R. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-8405945/v1
Joseph, R. P., Pituch, K. A., Yu, F., Salisbury, D. L., & Maxfield, M. (2026) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/82494
“The observed retention rate of 88% was comparable with, or slightly higher than average rates reported in reviews and meta-analyses of health behavior change trials of similar durations [54], including PA interventions [12,55], lending support for feasibility of the intervention approach.”
Skinner, J. A., Leary, M., Whatnall, M. C., Collins, R. A., Pursey, K., Verdejo-García, A., Hay, P., Hides, L. M., Paxton, S. J., Collins, C. E., et al. (2026) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2026.115399
Leysen, D., Wurhofer, D., Höppchen, I., Bamberger, E. M., Breda, A., Carrozzo, E., Crutzen, R., Danner, R., Duca, I., Grote, V., et al. (2026) · JMIR Formative Research · doi:10.2196/90203
“We therefore suggest that it will be important to ensure during the recruitment process that participants’ intention to complete the study is high [38].”
Githinji, P., Seguin‐Fowler, R. A., On, A., Benner, L., Demment, M. M., Uribe, A. L. M., Szeszulski, J., Graham, M. L., & Rethorst, C. D. (2026) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2026.1876157
“A meta-analysis of behavior change interventions found average retention rates in trials of behavior change interventions to be approximately 80% (40); however, retention rates can vary based on context and participant characteristics (41).”
Mwangi, L., Brück, C. C., Katsara, A., Toes‐Zoutendijk, E., van Vuuren, A. J., Thelen, M., Nagetaal, I. D., Dekker, E., Spaander, M., van Leerdam, M. E., et al. (2026) · BMJ Open Gastroenterology · doi:10.1136/bmjgast-2026-002286
Metadata
- Authors
- Crutzen, R., Viechtbauer, W., Spigt, M., & Kotz, D.
- Affiliations
- Maastricht University (NL)
- Cancer Research UK (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Crutzen, Rik
- Venue
- Psychology & Health
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2014-12-09
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 122-134
- ISSN
- 0887-0446 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-8321
- OpenAlex
- W2160645377
- Cited by
- 132
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6
- FWCI
- 2.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Psychology and Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Lirias (submittedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Keywords
- differential attrition, health behavior change interventions, attrition rates, internal validity, control conditions, intervention intensity, follow-up intensity
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Patient Dropouts, Health Behavior, Bias, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
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
