Evaluation of Peer-led EVERYbody Project

Sponsor
Western Washington University (Other)
Overall Status
Completed
CT.gov ID
NCT04517942
Collaborator
(none)
141
1
2
11
12.8

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

The second trial of the EVERYbody Project explored the efficacy of the inclusive body image intervention when delivered by college peer leaders. The peer-facilitated EVERYbody Project was compared to a video and expressive writing comparison intervention through one-month follow-up.

Condition or Disease Intervention/Treatment Phase
  • Behavioral: EVERYbody Project
  • Other: Video + Expressive Writing
N/A

Detailed Description

The initial trial of the EVERYbody Project established that professional leaders could deliver a universal, inclusive body image program for college students, with benefit above and beyond a waitlist control condition. The second trial of the EVERYbody Project aimed to further evaluate the intervention using a more disseminable facilitator model: trained college student peer leaders. It also utilized a more rigorous comparison condition, where peer leaders conducted the two-session EVERYbody Project program or a time-matched video and expressive writing intervention. College students within a university in the Pacific Northwest United States were invited to participate in programming (universal intervention target). Quantitative assessment included a comparison of changes in eating disorder risk factor outcomes across randomization conditions at pre- and post-intervention and one-month follow-up. Feasibility and acceptability explored the impact of the peer delivered program within universal college student audiences.

Study Design

Study Type:
Interventional
Actual Enrollment :
141 participants
Allocation:
Randomized
Intervention Model:
Factorial Assignment
Intervention Model Description:
After signing up for a specific time slot, participants were randomized in blocks of 10 to the EVERYbody Project or video comparison condition (two blocks of 10 participant slots were available in each time slot).After signing up for a specific time slot, participants were randomized in blocks of 10 to the EVERYbody Project or video comparison condition (two blocks of 10 participant slots were available in each time slot).
Masking:
None (Open Label)
Primary Purpose:
Prevention
Official Title:
An Evaluation of the Peer-delivered EVERYbody Project: Eating Disorder Risk Factor Reduction for College Students
Actual Study Start Date :
Oct 1, 2017
Actual Primary Completion Date :
Sep 1, 2018
Actual Study Completion Date :
Sep 1, 2018

Arms and Interventions

Arm Intervention/Treatment
Experimental: EVERYbody Project: Peer facilitator version

This dissonance-based body image program was created from focus group feedback (Ciao, Ohls, & Pringle, 2017) and piloted in an initial randomized-controlled trial. Based on the Body Project (Stice et al., 2006), it retains key dissonance activities while adapting exercises to have a more inclusive focus (e.g., expanding the gender focus, exploring diversity characteristics within appearance ideals, adjusting activities to be inclusive of diversity). Around 10% of the original EVERYbody Project manual was modified to create the Peer Facilitator version for the current trial. Changes focused on adding individual exercises to draw out the critique of diversity in cultural ideals, refining prompts to be more suitable for peer facilitation, and flagging sections of the manual for more "expert" peer facilitation. Peer facilitators received 16 hours of training on the EVERYbody Project manual and peer facilitation guidelines (e.g., group management, handling problems, etc.).

Behavioral: EVERYbody Project
Brief behavioral intervention (4 hours across two meetings)

Active Comparator: Video + Expressive Writing group

Video + expressive writing groups were facilitated by a peer leader following a detailed script. This intervention was designed as an active but low-dissonance comparison condition. Participants viewed two separate documentary movies related to gender and/or appearance-related pressures (one during each session): (1) The Illusionists (2015 ), and (2) The Mask You Live In (2015). Participants engaged in a brief (10 minute) reflective writing exercise after each film. In order to keep dissonance low, participants were told that their reflections would not be shared with anyone and they were not turned in. Peer facilitators received brief (1 hour) training on the video group manual.

Other: Video + Expressive Writing
Brief video-based intervention (4 hours across two meetings)

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

  1. Eating disorder symptoms [Assessed at baseline (Survey 1), post-intervention (Survey 2), and one-month follow-up (Survey 3)]

    Eating disorder symptoms were assessed with the Eating Disorders Examination Questionnaire (EDEQ; Fairburn & Beglin, 1994). The Global score of the EDEQ was used in this study (average across all 28 items).

  2. Body dissatisfaction [Assessed at baseline (Survey 1), post-intervention (Survey 2), and one-month follow-up (Survey 3)]

    The Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction with Body Parts Scale (SDBPS; Berscheid, Walster, & Bohrnstedt, 1973) assessed satisfaction and dissatisfaction with nine parts of the body that are commonly endorsed as concerning (e.g., stomach, thighs, hips). The average score was used in this study (average across all 9 items).

  3. Internalized cultural appearance norms [Assessed at baseline (Survey 1), following intervention Session 1 (Survey 1.B), post-intervention (Survey 2), and one-month follow-up (Survey 3)]

    The two Internalization subscales of the Sociocultural Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire-4 (SATAQ-4; Schaefer et al., 2015) assess internalized cultural messages surrounding appearance and attractiveness. The two internalization subscales were combined for this study (average across all 10 items), following prior research by Kilpela et al. (2016). This survey was assessed at all outcome time points (Survey 1, 2, and 3), plus midway through the intervention (following Session 1 of the program).

Secondary Outcome Measures

  1. Negative affect [Assessed at baseline (Survey 1), post-intervention (Survey 2), and one-month follow-up (Survey 3)]

    Negative affect was assessed with 20 items from the fear, guilt, and sadness subscales of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-Revised (PANAS-X; Watson & Clark, 1992). The average of all 20 items was used in this study.

Other Outcome Measures

  1. Program satisfaction and application [Assessed at post-intervention (Survey 2) and one-month follow-up (Survey 3).]

    A series of feedback questions were used to gauge satisfaction with the EVERYbody Project (based on Ciao et al., 2015). These questions included four Likert scale items about enjoyment (e.g., "I enjoyed the EVERYbody Project") rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) as well as open-ended questions (e.g., "Was any part of the EVERYbody Project particularly helpful/useful? If so, which part and why?") These questions were administered immediately following participation in the EVERYbody Project as a part of the post-intervention survey (Survey 2). At post-intervention (Survey 2) and one-month follow-up (Survey 3), three questions gauged application of information learned in the program (e.g., "How often do think about the things you learned in the EVERYbody Project?" rated on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (all the time).

Eligibility Criteria

Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study:
18 Years and Older
Sexes Eligible for Study:
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
Yes
Inclusion Criteria:
  • Current college student enrolled at institution where research was taking place
Exclusion Criteria:
  • None

Contacts and Locations

Locations

Site City State Country Postal Code
1 Western Washington University Bellingham Washington United States 98225

Sponsors and Collaborators

  • Western Washington University

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Anna C Ciao, PhD, Western Washington University

Study Documents (Full-Text)

None provided.

More Information

Publications

Responsible Party:
Anna Ciao, Associate Professor of Psychology, Western Washington University
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT04517942
Other Study ID Numbers:
  • 17-004_2
First Posted:
Aug 19, 2020
Last Update Posted:
Aug 12, 2021
Last Verified:
Aug 1, 2021
Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
Yes
Plan to Share IPD:
Yes
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product:
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product:
No
Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Study Results

No Results Posted as of Aug 12, 2021