Socioeconomic StatusLPINCT02048774
Leader Partner Interactions
A study testing Designation of Social Positioning in people with Socioeconomic Status and Food Intake, run by University of Alabama at Birmingham at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Obesity is often cited as being inversely related with socioeconomic status (SES), although the mechanisms linking social status with obesity are not well understood. Dietary restraint, physical activity, and social mobility have been proposed as possible mechanisms. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 19 to 25 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Socioeconomic Status, Food Intake
- What is being tested?
- Designation of Social Positioning
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 58 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Feb 2014to Dec 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 19 to 25 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Male and female college student between the ages of 19 and 25
Who cannot join
- Those with food allergies
- Pregnant individuals
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
UAB School of Health Professions; Webb Building Rooms 503 and 504
Birmingham, Alabama
About this study
Obesity is often cited as being inversely related with socioeconomic status (SES), although the mechanisms linking social status with obesity are not well understood. Dietary restraint, physical activity, and social mobility have been proposed as possible mechanisms. Although there is some evidence of SES variation in the proposed mechanisms, evidence is mixed and mostly observational. The purpose of this research is to determine if one's social position influences eating behaviors. This study will attempt to determine this using a randomized, 2 parallel arm trial to determine the effects that social hierarchy positioning has on energy intake. To prevent compromise in the integrity of data, the investigators will detail the exact treatment condition (i.e., social positioning) after the data collection period.
Based on findings from previous animal and large clinical observational studies, there are two complementary hypotheses tested in this study. First, it is hypothesized that being in a lower social position affects one's perception of food availability by making the future availability of food seem less certain. This uncertainty will lead to increased food consumption. Second, it is hypothesized that being in a position of power will lower one's food consumption, as previous research has found that individuals in power tend to east less in groups. Understanding how social position influences food intake could help improve weight loss/maintenance interventions by identifying unexpected factors that could limit the intervention's effectiveness.
- Conditions
- Socioeconomic Status, Food Intake
- Being tested
- Designation of Social Positioning
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Designation of Social PositioningBehavioural
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| High Social Position | Active comparator | The investigators will randomly assign a participant to a higher social position. Receives: Behavioral: Designation of Social Positioning |
| Low Social Position | Experimental | The investigators will randomly assign a participant to a lower social position. Receives: Behavioral: Designation of Social Positioning |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Amount of Calories Selected and Consumed After Receiving Designation of Social Position
Measured: 1 hour after start of study
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 Jan 2014 (estimated)
- Study startFeb 2014
- Primary completionDec 2015
- Study completionDec 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Socioeconomic StatusStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Alabama at BirminghamThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 58 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Alabama at Birmingham
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Gregory pavela, University of Alabama at Birmingham
- Investigators
- Gregory Pavela, PhD, Principal investigator, Postdoctoral Trainee, University of Alabama at BirminghamDwight Lewis, PhD, Principal investigator, Postdoctoral Trainee, University of Alabama at BirminghamDavid B Allison, PhD, Study director, Associate Dean for Science, University of Alabama at BirminghamBrian Wansink, PhD, Principal investigator, Professor, Cornell UniversityEmily J Dhurandhar, PhD, Principal investigator, Assistant Professor, University of Alabama at BirminghamJohn Dawson, PhD, Principal investigator, Postdoctoral Trainee, University of Alabama at BirminghamMadeline Jeansonne, MA, Principal investigator, Program Coordinator 1, University of Alabama at Birmingham
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02048774
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- X131210007
- Acronym
- LPI
- Status last verified
- Jan 2016
- First submitted
- 27 Jan 2014
- Last updated
- 26 Jan 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Jan 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Leader Partner Interactions
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02048774
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LPI / X131210007
- Conditions
- Socioeconomic Status, Food Intake
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 58 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Alabama at BirminghamUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Feb 2014
- Primary completion
- Dec 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Dec 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 29 Jan 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Obesity is often cited as being inversely related with socioeconomic status (SES), although the mechanisms linking social status with obesity are not well understood. Dietary restraint, physical activity, and social mobility have been proposed as possible mechanisms. Although there is some evidence of SES variation in the proposed mechanisms, evidence is mixed and mostly observational. The purpose of this research is to determine if one's social position influences eating behaviors. This study will attempt to determine this using a randomized, 2 parallel arm trial to determine the effects that social hierarchy positioning has on energy intake. To prevent compromise in the integrity of data, the investigators will detail the exact treatment condition (i.e., social positioning) after the data collection period.
Based on findings from previous animal and large clinical observational studies, there are two complementary hypotheses tested in this study. First, it is hypothesized that being in a lower social position affects one's perception of food availability by making the future availability of food seem less certain. This uncertainty will lead to increased food consumption. Second, it is hypothesized that being in a position of power will lower one's food consumption, as previous research has found that individuals in power tend to east less in groups. Understanding how social position influences food intake could help improve weight loss/maintenance interventions by identifying unexpected factors that could limit the intervention's effectiveness.
Study design
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| High Social Position | Active comparator | Behavioral: Designation of Social PositioningThe investigators will randomly assign a participant to a higher social position. |
| Low Social Position | Experimental | Behavioral: Designation of Social PositioningThe investigators will randomly assign a participant to a lower social position. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 19 to 25 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Male and female college student between the ages of 19 and 25
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Those with food allergies
- Pregnant individuals
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Designation of Social Positioning | Behavioural | High Social Position, Low Social Position |
Primary outcome
Amount of Calories Selected and Consumed After Receiving Designation of Social Position
Time frame: 1 hour after start of study
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Jan 2016.
Related trials for Socioeconomic Status
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Healthy Aging in Neighborhoods of Diversity Across the Life Span (HANDLS)
Diabetes, Cerebrovascular Disease
Recruiting
Understanding and Addressing Risks of Low Socioeconomic Status and Diabetes for Heart Failure
Type2diabetes, Heart Failure
Recruiting
Digital Health Education to Improve Cardiovascular Health Across Different Socioeconomic Groups: e-DUCASS Advance
Cardiovascular Health, Health Literacy
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Determining the Optimal Amount of Structured Environments for Healthy Kids
Health Status Disparities, Pediatric Obesity
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Healthy Kids Beyond the Bell: Investigating the Impact of After-School and Summer Programs
Health Status Disparities, Pediatric Obesity
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Gregory Pavela, PhD principal investigator
Postdoctoral Trainee, University of Alabama at Birmingham
Dwight Lewis, PhD principal investigator
Postdoctoral Trainee, University of Alabama at Birmingham
David B Allison, PhD study director
Associate Dean for Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Designation of Social Positioning in people with Socioeconomic Status and Food Intake, run by University of Alabama at Birmingham at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Jan 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Amount of Calories Selected and Consumed After Receiving Designation of Social Position (time frame: 1 hour after start of study). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Jan 2016.