MyMedR

Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Blood Flow-restricted Exercise Does Not Induce a Cross-Transfer of Effect: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Ampomah K, Amano S, Wages NP, Volz L, Clift R, Ludin AFM, et al.

Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2019 Sep;51(9):1817-1827.
PMID: 30913160 DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001984

PURPOSE: The goal of this trial was to determine whether low-load blood flow-restricted (BFR) exercise of appendicular muscles induces a cross-transfer of effect to the trunk extensor (TE) muscles, such that low-load TE exercise would enhance TE size and function to a greater extent than standard low-load exercise in people with recurrent low back pain (LBP). We also investigated the direct effects of BFR exercise in the appendicular muscles.
METHODS: Thirty-two adults with recurrent, nonspecific LBP were randomized into two groups: Appendicular BFR exercise (BFR exercise) or control exercise (CON exercise). All participants trained (two times per week) for 10 wk, with a 12-wk follow-up. Participants performed three sets of leg extension (LE), plantar flexion (PF), and elbow flexion (EF) exercises followed by low-load TE exercise without BFR. Outcome measures included magnetic resonance imaging-derived muscle size (quadriceps and TE), strength (LE, PF, EF, and TE), and endurance (LE and TE).
RESULTS: There was no evidence for a cross-transfer of effect to the TE. There was also no statistically significant enhancement of limb skeletal muscle size or function of BFR relative to CON exercise at any time point; though, moderate effect sizes for BFR exercise were observed for enhanced muscle size and strength in the leg extensors.
CONCLUSIONS: Low-load BFR exercise of the appendicular muscles did not result in a cross-transfer of effect to the TE musculature. There was also no significant benefit of low-load BFR exercise on the appendicular muscle size and function, suggesting no benefit from low-load BFR exercise in adults with recurrent, nonspecific LBP.
The Psychological Science Accelerator's COVID-19 rapid-response dataset

Buchanan EM, Lewis SC, Paris B, Forscher PS, Pavlacic JM, Beshears JE, et al.

Sci Data, 2023 Feb 11;10(1):87.
PMID: 36774440 DOI: 10.1038/s41597-022-01811-7

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data.
Fulltext Author Correction: A multi-country test of brief reappraisal interventions on emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic

Wang K, Goldenberg A, Dorison CA, Miller JK, Uusberg A, Lerner JS, et al.

Nat Hum Behav, 2022 Sep;6(9):1318-1319.
PMID: 36002766 DOI: 10.1038/s41562-022-01441-4
Fulltext A multi-country test of brief reappraisal interventions on emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic

Wang K, Goldenberg A, Dorison CA, Miller JK, Uusberg A, Lerner JS, et al.

Nat Hum Behav, 2021 Aug;5(8):1089-1110.
PMID: 34341554 DOI: 10.1038/s41562-021-01173-x

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased negative emotions and decreased positive emotions globally. Left unchecked, these emotional changes might have a wide array of adverse impacts. To reduce negative emotions and increase positive emotions, we tested the effectiveness of reappraisal, an emotion-regulation strategy that modifies how one thinks about a situation. Participants from 87 countries and regions (n = 21,644) were randomly assigned to one of two brief reappraisal interventions (reconstrual or repurposing) or one of two control conditions (active or passive). Results revealed that both reappraisal interventions (vesus both control conditions) consistently reduced negative emotions and increased positive emotions across different measures. Reconstrual and repurposing interventions had similar effects. Importantly, planned exploratory analyses indicated that reappraisal interventions did not reduce intentions to practice preventive health behaviours. The findings demonstrate the viability of creating scalable, low-cost interventions for use around the world. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 12 May 2020. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.4878591.v1.
Fulltext In COVID-19 Health Messaging, Loss Framing Increases Anxiety with Little-to-No Concomitant Benefits: Experimental Evidence from 84 Countries

Dorison CA, Lerner JS, Heller BH, Rothman AJ, Kawachi II, Wang K, et al.

Affect Sci, 2022 Sep;3(3):577-602.
PMID: 36185503 DOI: 10.1007/s42761-022-00128-3

The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., "If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others") or potential gains (e.g., "If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others")? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions.