Dr Lee Ashton

© 2017, © The Author(s) 2017. Young adult men are under-represented in health research, and little is known about how to reach and engage them in lifestyle interventions. This mixed-methods study aimed to explore young males¿ preferences for recruitment strategies, content, format (delivery mode and program duration and frequency), and facilitator characteristics for future physical activity and nutrition interventions. Ten focus groups involving 61 men (aged 18¿25 years) in the Hunter region, New South Wales, Australia and an online survey distributed within Australia were completed by 282 males (aged 18¿25 years). Key focus group themes included a preference for recruitment via multiple sources, ensuring images and recruiters were relatable; intervention facilitators to be engaging and refrain from discussing negative consequences of being unhealthy. Key program content preferences included skill development and individualized goals and feedback. Focus groups and the survey confirmed a preference for multiple delivery modes, including; face-to-face (group and individual), with support using eHealth technologies. Survey results confirmed the most favored program content as: ¿healthy eating on a budget,¿ ¿quick and easy meals,¿ and ¿resistance training.¿ Focus group responses suggested a program duration of =6 months, with 2¿3 combined face-to-face and supportive eHealth sessions per week. Survey intervention duration preference was 3 months with 4 face-to-face sessions per month. Findings can guide the design, conduct, and evaluation of relevant contemporary physical activity and or nutrition interventions for young men. There is a need to identify the most effective ways to address young men¿s individual preferences in intervention research.

© 2016, © The Author(s) 2016. Many Australian young men (18-25 years) fail to meet recommendations in national dietary or physical activity (PA) guidelines. However, there is a lack of understanding of their perspectives on PA and diet to inform intervention design. This study examined young men¿s motivators and barriers to healthy eating and PA, along with differences by demographic and behavioral factors. A cross-sectional online survey was completed by 282 men aged 18 to 25 years in Australia. Results identified the most common motivators for healthy eating included improving health (63.5%), body image (52.3%), and increasing energy (32.1%). Motivators for PA included improving body image (44.6%), fitness (44.2%), and health (41.0%). Common barriers to healthy eating were access to unhealthy foods (61.1%), time to cook/prepare healthy foods (55.0%), and motivation to cook healthy foods (50.7%). Barriers for PA included motivation (66.3%), time (57.8%), and cost of equipment/facilities (33.3%). Significant differences (p <.01) in motivators to healthy eating and/or PA were identified for BMI category, marital status, PA level, alcohol intake, and stress levels. Significant differences were identified for barriers to healthy eating and/or PA by BMI, PA level, stress, and fruit and vegetable intake, assessed using Pearson¿s chi-square test. Findings suggest that promotion of benefits related to health, appearance/body image, increased energy and fitness, and addressing key barriers including motivation, time, financial restraints, and accessibility of unhealthy foods, could engage young men in improving lifestyle behaviors. Differences by demographic and behavioral factors suggest development of tailored programs to address diversity among young men may be required.

© 2017 A systematic review of randomized control trials (RCT) was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of eHealth behavioral interventions aiming to improve smoking rates, nutrition behaviors, alcohol intake, physical activity levels and/or obesity (SNAPO) in young adults. Seven electronic databases were searched for RCTs published in English from 2000 to April 2015 and evaluating eHealth interventions aiming to change one or multiple SNAPO outcomes, and including young adult (18¿35¿years) participants. Of 2,159 articles identified, 45 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most interventions targeted alcohol (n¿=¿26), followed by smoking (n¿=¿7), physical activity (n¿=¿4), obesity (n¿=¿4) and nutrition (n¿=¿1). Three interventions targeted multiple behaviors. The eHealth interventions were most often delivered via websites (79.5%). Most studies (n¿=¿32) compared eHealth interventions to a control group (e.g. waiting list control, minimal intervention), with the majority (n¿=¿23) showing a positive effect on a SNAPO outcome at follow-up. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly lower mean number of drinks consumed/week in brief web or computer-based interventions compared to controls (Mean Difference -¿2.43 [-¿3.54, -¿1.32], P¿<¿0.0001, n¿=¿10). Sixteen studies compared eHealth delivery modes, with inconsistent results across target behaviors and technology types. Nine studies compared eHealth to other modes of delivery (e.g. in person) with all finding no difference in SNAPO outcomes between groups at follow-up. This review provides some evidence for the efficacy of eHealth SNAPO interventions for young adults, particularly in the short-term and for alcohol interventions. But there is insufficient evidence for their efficacy in the longer-term, as well as which mode of delivery is most effective.

© 2015 Elsevier Inc. Objectives: To investigate the effectiveness of Smoking, Nutrition, Alcohol, Physical activity and Obesity (SNAPO) interventions in young men exclusively. The secondary aim was to evaluate the recruitment, retention and engagement strategies. Methods: A search with no date restrictions was conducted across seven databases. Randomized controlled trials recruiting young men only (aged 18-35. years) into interventions targeting any SNAPO risk factors were included. Results: Ten studies were included (two nutrition, six alcohol use, two targeting multiple SNAPO risk factors). Six studies (two nutrition, three alcohol use and one targeting multiple SNAPO risk factors) demonstrated significant positive short-term intervention effects, but impact was either not assessed beyond the intervention (n = 3), had short-term follow-up (= 6 months) (n = 2) or not sustained beyond six months (n = 1). Overall, a high risk of bias was identified across studies. Only one study undertook a power calculation and recruited the required sample size. Adequate retention was achieved in three studies. Effectiveness of engagement strategies was not reported in any studies. Conclusions: Despite preliminary evidence of short-term effectiveness of SNAPO interventions in young men, few studies characterized by a high risk of bias were identified. High quality SNAPO interventions for young men are warranted.

© 2014 Bryant et al. Background: Existing systematic reviews aimed at comparing effectiveness of childhood obesity treatment interventions are limited by a lack of quality in the conduct and reporting of trials in this area. This study aimed to identify the number and types of primary and secondary outcomes used within trials of childhood obesity treatments and to determine the degree to which these trials correctly report their use of outcome measures. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify phase II (i.e. pilot and feasibility studies) and phase III (e.g. determining effectiveness) trials of childhood obesity treatments across 11 databases. Data were extracted from eligible manuscripts pertaining to the number and type of outcome measures used, in addition to details of citations provided for these measures. Results: 145 different outcome measures were reported to be used within 200 identified eligible trial manuscripts. Citations were provided to indicate the provenance for 417 measures, but only 13% of these were correctly linked to papers describing the development and/or evaluation of measures. Conclusions: This study identified inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the use and reporting of outcome measures used by eligible trials. Researchers in this area are urged to consider guidelines such as CONSORT and the National Obesity Observatory Standard Evaluation Framework in the design and reporting of future trials.