Systematic review of body image flexibility interventions

This datafile comprises secondary data extracted from intervention and experimental studies that were included in a systematic review of body image flexibility interventions. The review aimed to investigate: • How effective are body image flexibility interventions for improving health outcomes in young people? • Can body image flexibility interventions offer a protective function in the context of a body image threat? • What mechanisms account for the effectiveness of body image flexibility interventions? The datafile contains extracted quantitative data (sample sizes, means and standard deviations) from 23 studies included in the review. Intervention effects were calculated as standardised mean differences (SMD) between intervention and comparison conditions: (a) no/minimal intervention control (Control) or (b) other evidence-based intervention (predominantly dissonance-based interventions; DBI). If studies included both a no/minimal intervention control and EBI, results for each are included. If there were multiple active intervention arms, the one most consistent with other studies was selected. Likewise, if studies had multiple follow-up assessments, only the final measurement was included for analysis. This data can be used to calculate SMDs for post-intervention values and/or change scores for each of the outcome variables. The SMDs can then be aggregated and analysed quantitatively based on comparisons and outcomes of interest (see further explanation in Steps to re-produce). All outcome variables are continuous measures. The SMDs presented in this datafile were derived from change scores, measured as pre-to-post change or pre-to-follow-up change as obtained directly from the original study or calculated based on pre, post, and follow-up group means and standard deviations (see below for Steps to re-produce). SMDs are presented as Hedges' g effect size (ES) with associated standard errors (SE), confidence intervals (CI), and p-values (p), which were estimated in SPSS via meta-analysis of continuous outcomes using raw data. Individual effect estimates were calculated so that a positive SMD favoured the body image flexibility intervention over comparator (Control or EBI). Our review (Brichacek et al., under review) found initial evidence to support improvements in health outcomes, protection against exposure to sociocultural body image threats, and reduction in inflexible ways of relating to one’s internal experiences relative to no/minimal intervention controls. Additionally, comparison with other evidence-based interventions, including cognitive and dissonance-based programs, suggested comparable effects. As only three studies conducted mediation analysis, it is unclear whether changes in body image flexibility and/or inflexibility explained intervention effects, highlighting an important area for future research.本数据文件包含了从系统性综述中选取的关于身体形象灵活性干预措施的研究的次级数据。该综述旨在探讨以下问题： • 身体形象灵活性干预措施对于改善青少年健康状况的有效性如何？ • 身体形象灵活性干预措施能否在身体形象威胁的背景下发挥保护作用？ • 什么机制可以解释身体形象灵活性干预措施的有效性？ 数据文件包含了综述中包含的23项研究的提取的定量数据（样本量、均值和标准差）。干预效果以干预组和比较组之间的标准化均数差（SMD）进行计算：（a）无/最小干预控制（对照组）或（b）其他基于证据的干预（主要基于失调干预；DBI）。如果研究包含无/最小干预控制和基于证据的干预，则结果均包含。如果存在多个活跃的干预组，则选择与其他研究最一致的那个。同样，如果研究有多个后续评估，则只包括分析中的最终测量值。 这些数据可以用来计算干预后值和/或每个结果变量的变化分数的SMD。然后可以根据比较和感兴趣的结局进行定量分析。所有结果变量均为连续性测量。 本数据文件中呈现的SMD是由变化分数推导而来，变化分数测量为从原始研究中直接获得的或基于前、后和随访组的均值和标准差计算得出的前-后或前-随访变化（详见以下“重生产步骤”）。SMD以Hedges' g效应量（ES）呈现，并附带相应的标准误（SE）、置信区间（CI）和p值（p），这些值是通过在SPSS中利用原始数据进行连续结局的元分析估计得出的。单独的效果估计是计算出来的，以便正的SMD表示身体形象灵活性干预措施相对于比较组（对照组或EBI）的优越性。 我们的综述（Brichacek等人，正在审稿中）发现了初步证据，支持了健康状况的改善、保护免受社会文化身体形象威胁的影响，以及与无/最小干预控制相比，减少了对自身内部体验的僵化方式。此外，与其他基于证据的干预措施（包括认知和失调程序）的比较表明，效果相当。由于只有三项研究进行了中介分析，因此尚不清楚身体形象灵活性及其僵化性的变化是否解释了干预效果，这突显了未来研究的重要领域。