Work site-based cancer prevention: primary results from the Working Well Trial.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES. This paper presents the behavioral results of the Working Well Trial, the largest US work site cancer prevention and control trial to date. METHODS. The Working Well Trial used a randomized, matched-pair evaluation design, with the work site as the unit of assignment and analysis. The study was conducted in 111 work sites (n = 28,000 workers). The effects of the intervention were evaluated by comparing changes in intervention and control work sites, as measured in cross-sectional surveys at baseline and follow-up. The 2-year intervention targeted both individuals and the work-site environment. RESULTS. There occurred a net reduction in the percentage of energy obtained from fat consumption of 0.37 percentage points (P = .033), a net increase in fiber densities of 0.13 g/1000 kcal (P = .056), and an average increase in fruit and vegetable intake of 0.18 servings per day (P = .0001). Changes in tobacco use were in the desired direction but were not significant. CONCLUSIONS. Significant but small differences were observed for nutrition. Positive trends, but no significant results, were observed in trial-wide smoking outcomes. The observed net differences were small owing to the substantial secular changes in target behaviors.

Multiple health behavior change research: An introduction and overview

“…Community-level promotional materials (e.g., public service announcements; billboards) also have been incorporated. Sometimes significant changes were seen on a few, but not all, targeted behaviors (Emmons, et al, 1994, Sorensen, et al, 1996. A Cochrane review of these large multifactor interventions estimated the net reduction in smoking prevalence at 20% (Ebrahim, et al, 2006).…”

Qualidade das bases de dados hospitalares no Brasil: alguns elementos

“…The conceptual alignments presented in the studies by Sorensen et al 6 and Lima et al 3 were used to delimit the quality analyses of the CNES, SIH, and CIH databases.…”

“…On the other hand, the model of evaluation of secondary databases proposed by Sorensen et al 6 stands out seven aspects that influence the value and credibility of these databases; some of the factors are in common with those related by Lima et al 3 , but there are also some others such as size of the databases, period of data records, data formatting, and the possibility of linkage with other databases.…”

“…Regarding the methods applied to assess these dimensions, the authors mentioned as main strategies: panel of experts, active search of records, comparison with criteria accepted by the scientific community, comparative analysis with other databases, evaluation of consistency between measures of the database and the completeness of these data, and temporal series evaluating the coherence of the observed tendency 3,6 .…”

“…In a study conducted in the Netherlands, Anema et al 5 mentioned the fact that the main issues in hospital databases are related to the manipulation of information to get better results in the performance surveillance applied by local authorities and to the nonstandardization of procedures and terminological specifications. Regarding research, the disadvantage of these databases is the lack of control from the researcher about data collection 4,6 .…”