Selvi B Williams

Screening and interventions for childhood overweight: a summary of evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Background. Childhood and adolescent overweight and obesity are related to health risks, medical conditions, and increased risk of adult obesity, with its attendant effects on morbidity and mortality rates. The prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity has more than doubled in the past 25 years. Purpose. This evidence synthesis examines the evidence for the benefits and harms of screening and early treatment of overweight among children and adolescents in clinical settings. Methods. We developed an analytic framework and 7 key questions representing the logical evidence connecting screening and weight control interventions with changes in overweight and behavioral, physiologic, and health outcomes in childhood or adulthood. We searched the Cochrane Library from 1996 to April 2004. We searched Medline, PsycINFO, DARE, and CINAHL from 1966 to April 2004. One reviewer abstracted relevant information from each included article into standardized evidence tables, and a second reviewer checked key elements. Two reviewers quality-graded each article with US Preventive Services Task Force criteria. Results. Although BMI is a measure of relative weight rather than adiposity, it is recommended widely for use among children and adolescents to determine overweight and is the currently preferred measure. The risk of adult overweight from childhood overweight provides the best available evidence to judge the clinical validity of BMI as an overweight criterion for children and adolescents. BMI measures in childhood track to adulthood moderately or very well, with stronger tracking seen for children with ≥1 obese parent and children who are more overweight or older. The probability of adult obesity (BMI of >30 kg/m2) is ≥50% among children >13 years of age whose BMI percentiles meet or exceed the 95th percentile for age and gender. BMI-based overweight categorization for individuals, particularly for racial/ethnic minorities with differences in body composition, may have limited validity because BMI measures cannot differentiate between increased weight for height attributable to relatively greater fat-free mass (muscle, bone, and fluids) and that attributable to greater fat. No trials of screening programs to identify and to treat childhood overweight have been reported. Limited research is available on effective, generalizable interventions for overweight children and adolescents that can be conducted in primary care settings or through primary care referrals. Conclusions. BMI measurements of overweight among older adolescents identify those at increased risk of developing adult obesity. Interventions to treat overweight adolescents in clinical settings have not been shown to have clinically significant benefits, and they are not widely available. Screening to categorize overweight among children under age 12 or 13 who are not clearly overweight may not provide reliable risk categorization for adult obesity. Screening in this age group is compromised by the fact that there is little generalizable evidence for primary care interventions. Because existing trials report modest short- to medium-term improvements (∼10–20% decrease in percentage of overweight or a few units of change in BMI), however, overweight improvements among children and adolescents seem possible.

Effectiveness of Weight Management Interventions in Children: A Targeted Systematic Review for the USPSTF

CONTEXT: Targeted systematic review to support the updated US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for obesity in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES: To examine the benefits and harms of behavioral and pharmacologic weight-management interventions for overweight and obese children and adolescents. METHODS: Our data sources were Ovid Medline, PsycINFO, the Education Resources Information Center, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the Cochrane databases, reference lists of other reviews and trials, and expert recommendations. After 2 investigators reviewed 2786 abstracts and 369 articles against inclusion/exclusion criteria, we included 15 fair- to good-quality trials in which the effects of treatment on weight, weight-related comorbidities, and harms were evaluated. Studies were quality rated by 2 investigators using established criteria. Investigators abstracted data into standard evidence tables. RESULTS: In the available research, obese (or overweight) children and adolescents aged 4 to 18 years were enrolled, and no studies targeted those younger than 4 years. Comprehensive behavioral interventions of medium-to-high intensity were the most effective behavioral approach with 1.9 to 3.3 kg/m2 difference favoring intervention groups at 12 months. More limited evidence suggests that these improvements can be maintained over the 12 months after the end of treatments and that there are few harms with behavioral interventions. Two medications combined with behavioral interventions resulted in small (0.85 kg/m2 for orlistat) or moderate (2.6 kg/m2 for sibutramine) BMI reduction in obese adolescents on active medication; however, no studies followed weight changes after medication use ended. Potential adverse effects were greater than for behavioral interventions alone and varied in severity. Only 1 medication (orlistat) has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for prescription use in those aged ≥12 years. CONCLUSIONS: Over the past several years, research into weight management in obese children and adolescents has improved in quality and quantity. Despite important gaps, available research supports at least short-term benefits of comprehensive medium- to high-intensity behavioral interventions in obese children and adolescents.

Screening for Child and Adolescent Depression in Primary Care Settings: A Systematic Evidence Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

CONTEXT. Depression among youth is a disabling condition that is associated with serious long-term morbidities and suicide. OBJECTIVE. To assess the health effects of routine primary care screening for major depressive disorder among children and adolescents aged 7 to 18 years. METHODS. Medline, the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, PsycInfo, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, recent systematic reviews, experts, and bibliographies from selected studies were the data sources. The studies selected were fair- and good-quality (on the basis of US Preventive Services Task Force criteria) controlled trials of screening and treatment (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and/or psychotherapy), diagnostic accuracy studies, and large observational studies that reported adverse events. Two reviewers quality-graded each article. One reviewer abstracted relevant information into standardized evidence tables, and a second reviewer checked key elements. RESULTS. We found no data describing health outcomes among screened and unscreened populations. Although the literature on diagnostic screening test accuracy is small and methodologically limited, it indicates that several screening instruments have performed fairly well among adolescents. The literature on treatment efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and/or psychotherapy is also small but includes good-quality randomized, controlled trials. Available data indicate that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, psychotherapy, and combined treatment are effective in increasing response rates and reducing depressive symptoms. Not all specific selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, however, seem to be efficacious. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment was associated with a small absolute increase in risk of suicidality (ie, suicidal ideation, preparatory acts, or attempts). No suicide deaths occurred in any of the trials. CONCLUSIONS. Limited available data suggest that primary care–feasible screening tools may accurately identify depressed adolescents and treatment can improve depression outcomes. Treating depressed youth with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors may be associated with a small increased risk of suicidality and should only be considered if judicious clinical monitoring is possible.

Validity of diabetes self-reports in the Women's Health Initiative.

ObjectiveThis study aims to determine the positive and negative predictive values of self-reported diabetes during the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) clinical trials. MethodsAll WHI trial participants from four field centers who self-reported diabetes at baseline or during follow-up, as well as a random sample of women who did not self-report diabetes, were identified. Women were surveyed regarding diagnosis and treatment. Medical records were obtained and reviewed for documented treatment with antidiabetes medications or for physician diagnosis of diabetes supported by laboratory measurements of glucose. ResultsWe identified 1,275 eligible participants; 732 consented and provided survey data. Medical records were obtained for 715 women (prevalent diabetes, 207; incident diabetes, 325; no diabetes, 183). Records confirmed 91.8% (95% CI, 87.0-95.0) of self-reported prevalent diabetes cases and 82.2% (95% CI, 77.5-86.1) of incident diabetes cases. Among those who never self-reported diabetes, there was no medical record or laboratory evidence for diabetes in 94.5% (95% CI, 89.9-97.2). Women with higher body mass index were more likely to accurately self-report incident diabetes. In a subgroup of participants enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare, a claims algorithm correctly classified nearly all diabetes cases and noncases. ConclusionsAmong WHI clinical trial participants, there are high positive predictive values of self-reported prevalent diabetes (91.8%) and incident diabetes (82.2%) and a high negative predictive value (94.5%) when diabetes is not reported. For participants enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare, a claims algorithm has high positive and negative predictive values.