CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01503333Updated Nov 21, 2018Results posted

Girls on the Move Intervention to Increase Physical Activity Among Middle School Girls

An interventional study of Physical activity intervention in Physical Activity, sponsored by Michigan State University. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to female participants aged 9 Years to 14 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-11-21.

Sponsored by Michigan State University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
1,543
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
9 Years to 14 Years
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

The purpose of this school-based trial is to test the efficacy of an intervention to increase moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) among middle school girls. The 17-week "Girls on the Move" (GOTM) intervention has 3 components. Two individual-level components occurring during school hours include: (1) two face-to-face motivational, individually tailored counseling sessions with a school nurse, and (2) an interactive Internet-based session during which each girl receives motivational, individually tailored feedback messages (at 9 weeks). A group-level component, 90-minute Physical Activity (PA) Club provides an important venue after school that includes activities to assist girls in establishing a behavioral pattern of MVPA. The control condition will complete data collection activities and receive their usual school offerings.

The investigators hypothesize that immediately post-intervention, minutes of MVPA will be greater by 16 min./wk. in the intervention than control group; At 9 months post-intervention follow-up, minutes of MVPA will be greater in the intervention than control group; and immediately post-intervention, cardiovascular (CV) fitness will be higher and body mass index (BMI) and percent body fat will be lower in the intervention than control group.

Read the detailed description

Our 17-week "Girls on the Move" (GOTM) intervention for middle school girls applies the Health Promotion Model (HPM) and Self-Determination Theory (SDT) and has 3 components. Two individual-level components occurring during school hours include: (1) two face-to-face motivational, individually tailored counseling sessions with a school nurse (occurring at baseline and near 17 wks.), and (2) an interactive Internet-based session during which each girl receives motivational, individually tailored feedback messages (at 9 wks.). A group-level component, 90-min. PA Club, led by PA instructors (e.g., individuals from community; teachers, including physical education (PE); and sports team coaches) provides an important venue after school that includes MVPAs (requested by girls in pilot) to assist girls in establishing a behavioral pattern of MVPA. The control condition will complete data collection activities and receive their usual school offerings.

The purpose of this school-based group randomized trial (GRT) is to evaluate the efficacy of the comprehensive GOTM intervention to increase middle school girls' min. of MVPA and improve cardiovascular (CV) fitness, body mass index (BMI), and percent body fat (% BF) immediately post-intervention (after 17 wks.) and MVPA at 9-mo. follow-up (F/U; 9 mos. after end of intervention). Secondary analyses will examine if MVPA is mediated by cognitive (e.g., perceived benefits of PA, barriers to PA, and PA self-efficacy; social support) and affective variables (e.g., enjoyment of and motivation for PA).

Based on demographics of the urban schools, we expect a low-SES, mixed-race, predominately African American, sample. Eight schools will be randomly assigned to the PA intervention (n = 4) or comparison condition (n = 4) in the fall of yrs. 2, 3, and 4 (total N = 8 X 3 = 24 different schools). Sixty-two girls meeting inclusion criteria based on answers to a screening tool will be recruited in each school during each of the three yrs.

The long-term goal is to increase MVPA as a means to address the high overweight and obesity prevalence among adolescent girls.

02

Conditions studied

  • Physical Activity

Keywords

  • exercise
  • adolescent
  • intervention
  • female
  • counseling
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Michigan State University is the lead sponsor of 139 studies on the registry; 26 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
9 Years to 14 Years
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • 5th- 6th- and 7th-grade girls (ages 9-14; 8th-graders if needed in middle schools having only 7th- and 8th- grades)
  • Available and willing to participate in PA Club 3 days/wk. for 17wks.
  • Available for follow-up (9 mos. after intervention ends)
  • Agree to random assignment
  • Able to read, understand, and speak English.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Involved in or planning to be involved in school or community sports or other organized PAs, such as dance lessons, that involve MVPA and require participation 3 or more days/wk. after school during every season of the school year
  • A health condition precluding safe MVPA.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
1,543 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • No intervention
    Control

    The control condition will complete data collection activities and receive their usual school offerings.

  • Experimental
    Physical activity intervention

    Receiving Physical activity intervention which includes individual counseling with the school nurse, tailored feedback from computer program, and after-school physical activity club.

    Behavioral: Physical activity intervention

Interventions

  • BehavioralPhysical activity intervention

    Receiving individual counseling with the school nurse, tailored feedback from computer program, and after-school physical activity club.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Minutes of Moderate to Vigorous Physical Activity (MVPA) Post-intervention

    Minutes of MVPA were measured via ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometers worn on an elastic belt at the right hip for 7 consecutive days, including 5 weekdays and 2 weekend days at post-intervention. Monitors were set to start collecting and storing data in raw format beginning 5:00 A.M. on the day after they were distributed to girls each school. Data were re-integrated to 15-second epochs and processed using established intensity cut-points. One week after distribution, data collectors returned to each school to collect the accelerometers. The majority (1386 \[post-intervention\] of 1519 girls \[baseline\], 91.24%) provided at least 8 hours of data on 3 weekdays and 1 weekend day. An imputation approach based on all available data in hour blocks on all 7 days was implemented. Wear time was standardized to 14 hours/weekday (one hour before each school's actual start time; 7 hours during school; 6 hours after school) and 10 hours/weekend day (later awake time from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m.).

    Time frame: Minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per hour at post-intervention (after 17-week intervention)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Cardiovascular Fitness (Aerobic Performance)

    Between group comparison measured by number of laps run in a progressive shuttle run test. CV fitness was assessed via estimation of maximal oxygen consumption.

    Time frame: Cardiovascular fitness after 17-week intervention (post-intervention)

  2. Body Mass Index (BMI) Z-score

    To obtain BMI-z score, height and weight were assessed. Height was measured to nearest 0.1 cm using portable stadiometer. Weight was assessed to nearest 0.1 kg with foot-to-foot bioelectric impedance analysis scale. BMI was calculated and then converted into a percentile using age- and sex-specific reference values from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention growth charts to determine BMI-z score.

    Time frame: Body mass index z-score at post-intervention (after 17-week intervention)

  3. Percent Body Fat

    Percent body fat estimated via a foot-to-foot body weight scale with bioelectrical impedance analysis capabilities.

    Time frame: Percent body fat at post-intervention (immediately after 17-week intervention)

Other outcomes

  1. Minutes of Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity 9-month Follow up

    Minutes of MVPA were measured via ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometers worn on an elastic belt at the right hip for 7 consecutive days, including 5 weekdays and 2 weekend days at 9-month follow up. Monitors were set to start collecting and storing data in raw format beginning 5:00 A.M. on the day after they were distributed to girls each school. Data were re-integrated to 15-second epochs and processed using established intensity cut-points. One week after distribution, data collectors returned to each school to collect the accelerometers. An imputation approach based on all available data in hour blocks on all 7 days was implemented. Wear time was standardized to 14 hours/weekday (one hour before each school's actual start time; 7 hours during school; 6 hours after school) and 10 hours/weekend day (later awake time from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m.).

    Time frame: 9 months after the end of the 17-week intervention

  2. Perceived Benefits of Physical Activity

    To assess positive consequences of physical activity, girls completed 10-item Perceived Benefits Scale. Response choices ranged form (0) not at all true to (3) very true. Higher score means better outcome.

    Time frame: baseline to post-intervention

  3. Perceived Barriers to Physical Activity

    To assess obstacles interfering with physical activity, girls completed a 16-item Perceived Barriers Scale. Response choices ranged from (0) not at all true to (3) very true. Higher score means worse outcome.

    Time frame: Baseline to post-intervention

  4. Physical Activity Self-Efficacy

    To measure girls' confidence in their ability to attain physical activity during their free time when facing barriers or not, a 6-item Physical Activity Self-Efficacy scale was used. Response choices ranged from (0) disagree a lot to (3) agree a lot. Higher score means better outcome.

    Time frame: baseline to post-intervention

  5. Social Support for Physical Activity

    To measure assistance for physical activity received form others, an 8-item Social Support Scale was used. Response choices ranged form (0) never to (3) often. Higher score means better outcome.

    Time frame: baseline to post-intervention

  6. Enjoyment of Physical Activity

    To assess feelings or fun regarding physical activity, a 6-item Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale was used. Response choices ranged form (0) not at all true to (3) very true. Higher score means better outcome.

    Time frame: baseline to post-intervention

  7. Motivation for Physical Activity

    To assess feelings regarding physical activity, a 10-item scale was used. Response choices ranged from (0) not true to (4) very true. Higher score means better outcome.

    Time frame: baseline to post-intervention

07

Results

Posted Nov 21, 2018
Limitations and caveats
Costs were not analyzed. Attendance at the physical activity (PA) club was less than optimal. Study lacked a plan for girls to sustain PA in post-intervention period. Generalizability may be limited (sample selected from certain geographical area).

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneControlPhysical Activity Intervention
Started777766
Completed baseline766753
Completed post-intervention680706
Completed437461
Not completed340305

Outcome measures

PrimaryMinutes of Moderate to Vigorous Physical Activity (MVPA) Post-intervention

Minutes of MVPA were measured via ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometers worn on an elastic belt at the right hip for 7 consecutive days, including 5 weekdays and 2 weekend days at post-intervention. Monitors were set to start collecting and storing data in raw format beginning 5:00 A.M. on the day after they were distributed to girls each school. Data were re-integrated to 15-second epochs and processed using established intensity cut-points. One week after distribution, data collectors returned to each school to collect the accelerometers. The majority (1386 \[post-intervention\] of 1519 girls \[baseline\], 91.24%) provided at least 8 hours of data on 3 weekdays and 1 weekend day. An imputation approach based on all available data in hour blocks on all 7 days was implemented. Wear time was standardized to 14 hours/weekday (one hour before each school's actual start time; 7 hours during school; 6 hours after school) and 10 hours/weekend day (later awake time from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m.).

Time frame:
Minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per hour at post-intervention (after 17-week intervention)
Reported as:
Mean · mean minutes per hour
Minutes of Moderate to Vigorous Physical Activity (MVPA) Post-intervention
mean minutes per hourControlPhysical Activity Intervention
Minutes of Moderate to Vigorous Physical Activity (MVPA) Post-intervention3.27 ± 1.493.27 ± 1.49
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Physical Activity Intervention · Mixed Models Analysis · p = .207 · Parameter estimate: -0.08 · 95% CI -0.21 to 0.05
SecondaryCardiovascular Fitness (Aerobic Performance)

Between group comparison measured by number of laps run in a progressive shuttle run test. CV fitness was assessed via estimation of maximal oxygen consumption.

Time frame:
Cardiovascular fitness after 17-week intervention (post-intervention)
Reported as:
Mean · ml/kg/min
Cardiovascular Fitness (Aerobic Performance)
ml/kg/minControlPhysical Activity Intervention
Cardiovascular Fitness (Aerobic Performance)37.32 ± 5.2837.51 ± 5.19
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Physical Activity Intervention · Mixed Models Analysis · p = .018 · Parameter estimate: 0.20 · 95% CI 0.03 to 0.36
SecondaryBody Mass Index (BMI) Z-score

To obtain BMI-z score, height and weight were assessed. Height was measured to nearest 0.1 cm using portable stadiometer. Weight was assessed to nearest 0.1 kg with foot-to-foot bioelectric impedance analysis scale. BMI was calculated and then converted into a percentile using age- and sex-specific reference values from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention growth charts to determine BMI-z score.

Time frame:
Body mass index z-score at post-intervention (after 17-week intervention)
Reported as:
Mean · z-score
Body Mass Index (BMI) Z-score
z-scoreControlPhysical Activity Intervention
Body Mass Index (BMI) Z-score1.01 ± 0.010.99 ± 0.01
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Physical Activity Intervention · Mixed Models Analysis · p = .191 · Parameter estimate: -0.02 · 95% CI -0.05 to 0.01
SecondaryPercent Body Fat

Percent body fat estimated via a foot-to-foot body weight scale with bioelectrical impedance analysis capabilities.

Time frame:
Percent body fat at post-intervention (immediately after 17-week intervention)
Reported as:
Mean · percent body fat
Percent Body Fat
percent body fatControlPhysical Activity Intervention
Percent Body Fat30.67 ± 0.1430.30 ± 0.14
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Physical Activity Intervention · Mixed Models Analysis · p = .007 · Parameter estimate: -0.37 · 95% CI -0.64 to -0.10
Other pre-specifiedMinutes of Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity 9-month Follow up

Minutes of MVPA were measured via ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometers worn on an elastic belt at the right hip for 7 consecutive days, including 5 weekdays and 2 weekend days at 9-month follow up. Monitors were set to start collecting and storing data in raw format beginning 5:00 A.M. on the day after they were distributed to girls each school. Data were re-integrated to 15-second epochs and processed using established intensity cut-points. One week after distribution, data collectors returned to each school to collect the accelerometers. An imputation approach based on all available data in hour blocks on all 7 days was implemented. Wear time was standardized to 14 hours/weekday (one hour before each school's actual start time; 7 hours during school; 6 hours after school) and 10 hours/weekend day (later awake time from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m.).

Time frame:
9 months after the end of the 17-week intervention
Reported as:
Mean · mean minutes per hour
Minutes of Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity 9-month Follow up
mean minutes per hourControlPhysical Activity Intervention
Minutes of Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity 9-month Follow up2.64 ± 1.152.59 ± 1.19
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Physical Activity Intervention · Mixed Models Analysis · p = .118 · Parameter estimate: -0.09 · 95% CI -0.21 to 0.02
Other pre-specifiedPerceived Benefits of Physical Activity

To assess positive consequences of physical activity, girls completed 10-item Perceived Benefits Scale. Response choices ranged form (0) not at all true to (3) very true. Higher score means better outcome.

Time frame:
baseline to post-intervention
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Perceived Benefits of Physical Activity
score on a scaleControlIntervention
Perceived Benefits of Physical Activity2.22 ± 0.512.29 ± 0.53
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Intervention · Parameter estimate: -.97
Other pre-specifiedPerceived Barriers to Physical Activity

To assess obstacles interfering with physical activity, girls completed a 16-item Perceived Barriers Scale. Response choices ranged from (0) not at all true to (3) very true. Higher score means worse outcome.

Time frame:
Baseline to post-intervention
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Perceived Barriers to Physical Activity
score on a scaleControlIntervention
Perceived Barriers to Physical Activity1.14 ± 0.601.26 ± 0.63
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Intervention · Parameter estimate: 2.90
Other pre-specifiedPhysical Activity Self-Efficacy

To measure girls' confidence in their ability to attain physical activity during their free time when facing barriers or not, a 6-item Physical Activity Self-Efficacy scale was used. Response choices ranged from (0) disagree a lot to (3) agree a lot. Higher score means better outcome.

Time frame:
baseline to post-intervention
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Physical Activity Self-Efficacy
score on a scaleControlIntervention
Physical Activity Self-Efficacy2.14 ± 0.602.12 ± 0.64
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Intervention · Parameter estimate: .47
Other pre-specifiedSocial Support for Physical Activity

To measure assistance for physical activity received form others, an 8-item Social Support Scale was used. Response choices ranged form (0) never to (3) often. Higher score means better outcome.

Time frame:
baseline to post-intervention
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Social Support for Physical Activity
score on a scaleControlIntervention
Social Support for Physical Activity1.73 ± 0.861.87 ± 0.82
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Intervention · Path analysis · p = <.001 · Parameter estimate: 30.48
Other pre-specifiedEnjoyment of Physical Activity

To assess feelings or fun regarding physical activity, a 6-item Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale was used. Response choices ranged form (0) not at all true to (3) very true. Higher score means better outcome.

Time frame:
baseline to post-intervention
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Enjoyment of Physical Activity
score on a scaleControlIntervention
Enjoyment of Physical Activity2.11 ± 0.722.11 ± 0.67
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Intervention · Path analysis · p = <.001 · Parameter estimate: 24.48
Other pre-specifiedMotivation for Physical Activity

To assess feelings regarding physical activity, a 10-item scale was used. Response choices ranged from (0) not true to (4) very true. Higher score means better outcome.

Time frame:
baseline to post-intervention
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Motivation for Physical Activity
score on a scaleControlIntervention
Motivation for Physical Activity3.48 ± 0.693.48 ± 0.68
Statistical analysis
  • Control vs Intervention · Parameter estimate: 3.19

Adverse events

Collected over From baseline data collection through post-intervention data collection after the 17-week intervention to 9-month post-intervention follow up (1 year, 2 months). Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Control—0/777 (0%)0/777 (0%)
Physical Activity Intervention—0/766 (0%)0/766 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)ControlPhysical Activity InterventionTotal
<=18 years7667531519
Between 18 and 65 years000
>=65 years000
Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)ControlPhysical Activity InterventionTotal
Mean12.05 ± 1.0212.05 ± 0.9912.05 ± 1.01
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)ControlPhysical Activity InterventionTotal
Female7667531519
Male000
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)ControlPhysical Activity InterventionTotal
Hispanic or Latino90111201
Not Hispanic or Latino6296031232
Unknown or Not Reported473986
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)ControlPhysical Activity InterventionTotal
American Indian or Alaska Native7613
Asian152641
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander202
Black or African American416340756
White198214412
More than one race9496190
Unknown or Not Reported3471105
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Michigan State University
    East Lansing, Michigan 48824, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Robbins LB, Pfeiffer KA, Vermeesch A, Resnicow K, You Z, An L, Wesolek SM. "Girls on the Move" intervention protocol for increasing physical activity among low-active underserved urban girls: a group randomized trial. BMC Public Health. 2013 May 15;13:474. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-474. PubMed 23672272 ↗
  • Ling J, Robbins LB, Resnicow K, Bakhoya M. Social support and peer norms scales for physical activity in adolescents. Am J Health Behav. 2014 Nov;38(6):881-9. doi: 10.5993/AJHB.38.6.10. PubMed 25207514 ↗
  • Vermeesch AL, Ling J, Voskuil VR, Bakhoya M, Wesolek SM, Bourne KA, Pfeiffer KA, Robbins LB. Biological and Sociocultural Differences in Perceived Barriers to Physical Activity Among Fifth- to Seventh-Grade Urban Girls. Nurs Res. 2015 Sep-Oct;64(5):342-50. doi: 10.1097/NNR.0000000000000113. PubMed 26325276 ↗
  • Robbins LB, Ling J, Wesolek SM, Kazanis AS, Bourne KA, Resnicow K. Reliability and Validity of the Commitment to Physical Activity Scale for Adolescents. Am J Health Promot. 2017 Jul;31(4):343-352. doi: 10.4278/ajhp.150114-QUAN-665. Epub 2016 Nov 17. PubMed 26730556 ↗
  • Gammon C, Pfeiffer KA, Kazanis A, Ling J, Robbins LB. Cardiorespiratory fitness in urban adolescent girls: associations with race and pubertal status. J Sports Sci. 2017 Jan;35(1):29-34. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2016.1154594. Epub 2016 Mar 4. PubMed 26942487 ↗
  • Robbins LB, Ling J, Toruner EK, Bourne KA, Pfeiffer KA. Examining reach, dose, and fidelity of the "Girls on the Move" after-school physical activity club: a process evaluation. BMC Public Health. 2016 Jul 30;16:671. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3329-x. PubMed 27473613 ↗
  • Bakhoya M, Ling J, Pfeiffer KA, Robbins LB. Evaluating Mailed Motivational, Individually Tailored Postcard Boosters for Promoting Girls' Postintervention Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity. Nurs Res. 2016 Sep-Oct;65(5):415-20. doi: 10.1097/NNR.0000000000000173. PubMed 27579509 ↗
  • Ling J, Robbins LB. Psychometric Evaluation of Three Psychosocial Measures Associated With Physical Activity Among Adolescent Girls. J Sch Nurs. 2017 Oct;33(5):344-354. doi: 10.1177/1059840516685857. Epub 2016 Dec 29. PubMed 28030983 ↗
  • Voskuil VR, Pierce SJ, Robbins LB. Comparing the Psychometric Properties of Two Physical Activity Self-Efficacy Instruments in Urban, Adolescent Girls: Validity, Measurement Invariance, and Reliability. Front Psychol. 2017 Aug 3;8:1301. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01301. eCollection 2017. PubMed 28824487 ↗
  • Robbins LB, Ling J, Resnicow K. Demographic differences in and correlates of perceived body image discrepancy among urban adolescent girls: a cross-sectional study. BMC Pediatr. 2017 Dec 6;17(1):201. doi: 10.1186/s12887-017-0952-3. PubMed 29207976 ↗
  • Robbins LB, Ling J, Dalimonte-Merckling DM, Sharma DB, Bakhoya M, Pfeiffer KA. Sources and Types of Social Support for Physical Activity Perceived by Fifth to Eighth Grade Girls. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2018 Mar;50(2):172-180. doi: 10.1111/jnu.12369. Epub 2017 Dec 21. PubMed 29266689 ↗
  • Robbins LB, Ling J, Wen F. Moderators in a physical activity intervention for adolescent girls. Pediatr Res. 2020 Nov;88(5):810-817. doi: 10.1038/s41390-020-0818-5. Epub 2020 Mar 2. PubMed 32120378 ↗
  • Pfeiffer KA, Robbins LB, Ling J, Sharma DB, Dalimonte-Merckling DM, Voskuil VR, Kaciroti N, Resnicow K. Effects of the Girls on the Move randomized trial on adiposity and aerobic performance (secondary outcomes) in low-income adolescent girls. Pediatr Obes. 2019 Nov;14(11):e12559. doi: 10.1111/ijpo.12559. Epub 2019 Jul 3. PubMed 31267695 ↗
  • Robbins LB, Ling J, Sharma DB, Dalimonte-Merckling DM, Voskuil VR, Resnicow K, Kaciroti N, Pfeiffer KA. Intervention Effects of "Girls on the Move" on Increasing Physical Activity: A Group Randomized Trial. Ann Behav Med. 2019 Mar 28;53(5):493-500. doi: 10.1093/abm/kay054. PubMed 29985968 ↗
10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 21, 2018, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01503333
Lead sponsor
Michigan State University
Collaborators
University of Michigan
Responsible party
Lorraine Robbins (Associate Professor, Michigan State University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jan 4, 2012
Start date
Sep 2011
Primary completion
May 2016
Completion
May 2016
Results posted
Nov 21, 2018
Last update
Nov 21, 2018

Study contacts

Lorraine B Robbins, PhD
principal investigator · Michigan State University

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2018. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion