Exploration of the individual and combined effects of predictors of engagement, dropout, and change from digital interventions for recurrent binge eating

Abstract

ObjectiveOur ability to predict responsiveness to digital interventions for eating disorders has thus far been poor, potentially for three reasons: (1) there has been a narrow set of predictors explored; (2) prediction has mostly focused on symptom change, ignoring other aspects of the user journey (uptake, early engagement); and (3) there is an excessive focus on the unique effects of predictors rather than the combined contributions of a predictor set. We evaluated the univariate and multivariate effects of outcome predictors in the context of a randomized trial (n = 398) of digitally delivered interventions for recurrent binge eating.MethodThirty baseline variables were selected as predictors, ranging from specific symptoms, to key protective factors, to technological acceptance, and to online treatment attitudes. Outcomes included uptake, early engagement, and remission. Univariate (d) and multivariate (D) standardized mean differences were calculated to estimate the individual and combined effects of predictors, respectively.ResultsAt the univariate level, few predictors produced an effect size larger than what is considered small (d > .20) across outcomes. However, our multivariate approach enhanced prediction (Ds = .65 to 1.12), producing accuracy rates greater than chance (63%–71% accuracy). Less than half of the chosen variables proved to be useful in contributing to predictions in multivariate models.ConclusionFindings suggest that accuracy in outcome prediction from digitally delivered interventions may be better driven by the aggregation of many small effects rather than one or several largely influential predictors. Replication with different data streams (sensor, neuroimaging) would be useful.Public SignificanceOur ability to predict who will and will not benefit from digital interventions for eating disorders has been poor. We highlight the viability of a multivariate approach to outcome prediction, whereby prediction may be better driven by the aggregation of many small effects rather than one or a few influential predictors.