Skip to content

De Por Vida: A Diabetes Risk Reduction Intervention for Hispanic Women

Culturally Competent Behavioral Intervention for Diabetes Risk Reduction

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03113916
Enrollment
195
Registered
2017-04-14
Start date
2014-06-23
Completion date
2018-03-05
Last updated
2020-09-23

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Diabetes, Obesity, PreDiabetes, Weight Loss

Keywords

Culturally-tailored, Weight Loss, Diabetes, Women, Hispanic, Obesity

Brief summary

This pragmatic randomized clinical trial will assess the efficacy, cost, and sustainability of a culturally tailored weight-loss program targeting obese Hispanic women with pre-diabetes or T2D. The intervention will be integrated into patient care at a Federally Qualified Health Center serving over 30,000 low-income patients, and will be delivered by trained clinic staff, with minimal support from research staff. After the effectiveness clinical trial, two cohorts of clinic patients will receive the intervention in a sustainability test.

Detailed description

Hispanic women have the highest estimated lifetime risk of developing diabetes of all ethnic/gender groups in the US, and their prevalence rates of overweight and obesity are among the highest in the US. Currently, nearly 90% of Hispanic women aged 40-59 are overweight or obese. If diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes (T2D) at age 40, Hispanic women are projected to lose 12.4 life-years, and 21.5 quality-adjusted life-years. Several clinical trials have produced compelling evidence demonstrating the benefits of weight-loss interventions for both diabetic and pre-diabetic individuals, but most of the successful interventions tested in large clinical trials have been too costly for implementation in community settings, and they have not been assessed under real life conditions, targeting vulnerable populations. This study builds on the investigators' success with a culturally-tailored weight-loss intervention designed for Hispanic women. Elements of cultural adaptation will include: women-only groups, skill-building tasks around food measurement, focus on traditional dietary habits and cultural norms regulating food preparation and consumption, interactive learning formats with a minimum of written materials, culturally congruent physical activity, and addressing acculturative concerns. Follow-up data, including change in weight, waist circumference, and diabetes outcomes, will be collected at 6-, 12-, and 18-months post randomization. Additional analyses will include the cost of delivering the intervention and assessing the intervention's sustainability. The results of this study will inform the development of interventions to prevent diabetes onset or manage T2D in this population. Description of Measures Used Southwest Food Frequency Questionnaire (SWFFQ). The Southwestern Food Frequency Questionnaire (SWFFQ) consists of 158 food items and was adapted from the Arizona Food Frequency Questionnaire. It provides a culturally appropriate means of collecting dietary information for the Southwestern U.S. Hispanic populations predominantly of Mexican descent. It is the only Spanish bicultural and bilingual questionnaire in widespread use in the country. Examples of food items that are included in the questionnaire are nopalitos (cactus leaves), corn and flour tortillas, refried beans, machaca, and chorizo. The SWFFQ has been tested for validity and reliability (Taren et al, 2000). The output provides 87 nutrients in addition to 25 derived variables such as percent of calories from fat. VALIDATION PAPER Taren D, Tobar M, Ritenbaugh C, Graver E, Whitacre R, Aickin M. Evaluation of the Southwest Food Frequency Questionnaire. Ecology of Food and Nutrition 38:515-547, 2000. General Practice Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPPAQ) The GPPAQ is a validated screening tool for use in primary care that is used to assess adult (16 - 74 years) physical activity levels. It provides a simple, 4-level Physical Activity Index (PAI) categorizing patients as: Active, Moderately Active, Moderately Inactive, and Inactive. SOURCE: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment\_data/file/192453/GPPAQ\_-\_guidance.pdf Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8). The CSQ-8 is a well-validated, 8-item Likert-type questionnaire that has been widely used in studies of physical and mental health among Spanish-speaking and Hispanic individuals. SOURCE http://www.csqscales.com/csq-8.htm Barriers to Healthy Eating Questionnaire (BHEQ) The BHE is a 22-item questionnaire asking individuals to rate various feelings or situations related to following the calorie and fat-restricted diet, eg, feelings of deprivation or cost of the recommended eating plan. It has 3 subscales: Emotions (11 items), Daily Mechanics of Following a Healthy Eating Plan (8 items), and Social Support (3 items). VALIDATION PAPER Impact of Perceived Barriers to Healthy Eating on Diet and Weight in a 24-Month Behavioral Weight Loss Trial. Wang, Jing et al. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior , Volume 47 , Issue 5 , 432 - 436.e1 Subjective Numeracy Scale The Subjective Numeracy Scale (SNS) is a self-report measure of perceived ability to perform various mathematical tasks and preferences for the use of numerical versus prose information. The SNS has been validated against objective numeracy measures and found to predict comprehension of risk communications and ability to complete utility elicitations. The De Por Vida study asked questions 3 and 4 of the SNS ability subscale which asked respondents to assess their numerical ability in different contexts. The scale contains no mathematics questions and has no correct or incorrect answers. VALIDATION PAPER Fagerlin, A., Zikmund-Fisher, B.J., Ubel, P.A., Jankovic, A., Derry, H.A., & Smith, D.M. Measuring numeracy without a math test: Development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale (SNS). Medical Decision Making, 2007: 27: 672-680. Screening Questions for Limited Health Literacy We asked 3 screening questions to assess limited health literacy validated by Chew et al. VALIDATION PAPER Chew LD, Griffin JM, Partin MR, et al. Validation of Screening Questions for Limited Health Literacy in a Large VA Outpatient Population. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2008;23(5):561-566. doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0520-5. Language-Based Acculturation Scale A simple scale for quantifying English use among Mexican Americans was constructed from four brief questions which proved to have excellent scaling characteristics by Guttman Scalogram Analysis in two independent data sets. Construct validity was established by significant associations of the scale with ethnicity, place of birth, generation within the United States, and type of neighborhood. Highly significant associations were found between scale scores and use of oral contraceptives, parity, fatalism regarding health, and attitudes toward folk healers. These associations remained significant (though weak) after controlling for education and family income. The language scale thus appears to be reliable and valid, to be capable of distinguishing meaningful subsets among the Mexican American population, and to be applicable to health care investigation. VALIDATION PAPER A Simple Language-based Acculturation Scale for Mexican Americans: Validation and Application to Health Care Research. Deyo, Richard A.; And Others. American Journal of Public Health, v75 n1 p51-55 Jan 1985

Interventions

BEHAVIORALBehavioural Lifestyle Intervention

A culturally tailored behavioral intervention.

Sponsors

Arizona State University
CollaboratorOTHER
Kaiser Permanente
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Intervention model description

Trial participants are randomly assigned to one of two conditions: 1) Enhanced usual care control, or 2) a culturally tailored behavioral intervention.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* All participants will be patients who receive their primary medical care at the Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center (VGMHC) * Self-identified as Spanish-speaking Latina or Hispanic * Female * Age 18 and older * BMI greater than or equal to 27kg/m2 * Classified as diabetic or prediabetic in the electronic medical record by at least one of the following: * Fasting plasma glucose ≥ 100 * 2-h post glucose level on the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test ≥ 140-199 mg/dL (7.8-11.0 mmol/L) * Hemoglobin HBA1c ≥ 5.7 * Diagnosis of diabetes in patient's medical chart * Diagnosis of prediabetes in patient's medical chart * Residing in the Portland metropolitan area, and having no plans to leave the area in the next 18 months. * Willing and able to attend the 26-weekly group meetings and 6 monthly group meetings. * Willing to accept random assignment to the active intervention or enhanced usual care control. * Clearance by the patient's VGMHC primary care physician to participate in the intervention.

Exclusion criteria

* Treatment for cancer in the past two years (excluding non-melanoma skin cancers). * Having conditions that require limitation of physical activity or that would be contraindicated for the DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diet patterns. * Taking weight-loss medication currently or within the past 6 months. * Current or recent (\< 12 months) pregnancy, breastfeeding, or planning pregnancy in the next 18 months.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Waist Circumference in CentimetersBaseline, 6, 12, and 18 monthsComparison of waist circumference trajectories in centimeters between the intervention and usual-care control groups.
Weight in KilogramsBaseline, 6, 12, and 18 monthsComparison of body weight trajectories in kilograms between the intervention and usual-care control groups.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Fasting Blood Glucose (Fbg; Transformed Using the Inverse Square, or 1/Fbg in mg/dl^2 )Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 monthsComparison of fasting blood glucose trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups. Because of the severe kurtosis and skewness present in this outcome, a transformation (using the inverse square, or 1/fasting blood glucose in mg/dl\^2) was undertaken to better meet the assumptions of the analysis. Thus, the trajectory differences between arms were formally tested using the inverse square of fasting blood glucose, and back transforming the least square mean estimates from this model will not result in the least square means in the original metric. We performed a sensitivity analysis using the untransformed fasting blood glucose, and that model exhibited poorer model fit. We can present the crude, observed means, or the least square means from the model using the untransformed fasting blood glucose if it is of greater priority to have more direct interpretability of the fasting blood glucose values than using the model that better meets the statistical assumptions.
Total CholesterolBaseline, 6, 12, and 18 monthsComparison of total cholesterol trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups.
Number of Fruit Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 monthsComparison of number fruit servings per day trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups. Because of the severe kurtosis and skewness present in this outcome, a transformation (using the natural log) was undertaken to better meet the assumptions of the analysis. Thus, the trajectory differences between arms were formally tested using the log of the number of fruit servings per day, and back transforming the least square mean estimates from this model will not result in the least square means in the original metric. We performed a sensitivity analysis using the untransformed number of fruit servings per day, and that model exhibited poorer model fit. We can present the crude, observed means, or the least square means from the model using the untransformed number of fruit servings per day if it is of greater priority to have more direct interpretability of the # of fruit servings per day values than using the model that better meets the statistical assumptions.
Sugar Intake in GramsBaseline, 6, 12, and 18 monthsComparison of the sugar intake in grams trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups.
Dietary Fiber Intake in Grams (Transformed Using the Natural Log)Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 monthsComparison of the dietary fiber intake in grams trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups. Because of the severe kurtosis and skewness present in this outcome, a transformation (using the natural log) was undertaken to better meet the assumptions of the analysis. Thus, the trajectory differences between arms were formally tested using the log of the dietary fiber intake in grams and back transforming the least square mean estimates from this model will not result in the least square means in the original metric. We performed a sensitivity analysis using the untransformed dietary fiber intake in grams, and that model exhibited poorer model fit. We can present the crude, observed means, or the least square means from the model using the untransformed dietary fiber intake in grams if it is of greater priority to have more direct interpretability of the dietary fiber intake in grams values than using the model that better meets the statistical assumptions.
Saturated Fat Intake as Percentage of Total Energy IntakeBaseline, 6, 12, and 18 monthsComparison of the saturated fat intake as percentage of total energy intake trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups.
Number of Vegetable Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 monthsComparison of the dietary intake of the number of vegetable servings per day trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups. Because of the severe kurtosis and skewness present in this outcome, a transformation (using the natural log) was undertaken to better meet the assumptions of the analysis. Thus, the trajectory differences between arms were formally tested using the log of the number of vegetable servings per day, and back transforming the least square mean estimates from this model will not result in the least square means in the original metric. We performed a sensitivity analysis using the untransformed outcome, and that model exhibited poorer model fit. We can present the crude, observed means, or the least square means from the model using the untransformed number of vegetable servings per day if it is of greater priority to have more direct interpretability of the outcome values than using the model that better meets the statistical assumptions.
Number of KilocaloriesBaseline, 6, 12, and 18 monthsComparison of the number of kilocalories trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups.
Hemoglobin HbA1c % (Transformed Using the Inverse Cube, or 1/HbAlc%^3)Baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months from enrollmentComparison of hemoglobin HbA1c trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups. Because of the severe kurtosis and skewness present in this outcome, a transformation (using the inverse cube, or 1/HbAlc%\^3) was undertaken to better meet the assumptions of the analysis. Thus, the trajectory differences between arms were formally tested using the inverse cube of HbA1c, and back transforming the least square mean estimates from this model will not result in the least square means in the original metric. We performed a sensitivity analysis using the untransformed HbA1c, and that model exhibited poorer model fit. We can present the crude, observed means, or the least square means from the model using the untransformed HbA1c if it is of greater priority to have more direct interpretability of the HbA1c values than using the model that better meets the statistical assumptions.

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Average Program Cost Per Participant12 monthsAverage cost per participant of the De Por Vida intervention and enhanced usual care
Recruit Participants for Sustainability PhasePost-intervention for 12 monthsNumber of participants recruited

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Behavioral
26 weekly behavioral intervention sessions 6 monthly behavioral intervention sessions Sessions focused on diet, physical activity, behavior change Behavioural Lifestyle Intervention: A culturally tailored behavioral intervention.
99
Enhanced Usual Care
Printed materials
96
Total195

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up12
Overall StudyPregnancy13
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject97

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicBehavioralEnhanced Usual CareTotal
Age, Continuous44 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10
43 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10
44 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
99 Participants96 Participants195 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
99 Participants96 Participants195 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
99 Participants96 Participants195 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 1020 / 98
other
Total, other adverse events
64 / 10249 / 98
serious
Total, serious adverse events
5 / 1022 / 98

Outcome results

Primary

Waist Circumference in Centimeters

Comparison of waist circumference trajectories in centimeters between the intervention and usual-care control groups.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralWaist Circumference in CentimetersBaseline115.2 centimeters
BehavioralWaist Circumference in Centimeters12 months112.9 centimeters
BehavioralWaist Circumference in Centimeters6 months113.5 centimeters
BehavioralWaist Circumference in Centimeters18 months112.6 centimeters
Enhanced Usual CareWaist Circumference in Centimeters6 months114.7 centimeters
Enhanced Usual CareWaist Circumference in CentimetersBaseline115.6 centimeters
Enhanced Usual CareWaist Circumference in Centimeters18 months114.3 centimeters
Enhanced Usual CareWaist Circumference in Centimeters12 months114.5 centimeters
p-value: 0.2395% CI: [-1.29, 0.31]Mixed Models Analysis
Primary

Weight in Kilograms

Comparison of body weight trajectories in kilograms between the intervention and usual-care control groups.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralWeight in KilogramsBaseline87.1 kilograms
BehavioralWeight in Kilograms6 Months84.4 kilograms
BehavioralWeight in Kilograms12 Months84.2 kilograms
BehavioralWeight in Kilograms18 Months84.2 kilograms
Enhanced Usual CareWeight in Kilograms18 Months85.8 kilograms
Enhanced Usual CareWeight in KilogramsBaseline86.3 kilograms
Enhanced Usual CareWeight in Kilograms12 Months85.8 kilograms
Enhanced Usual CareWeight in Kilograms6 Months85.9 kilograms
p-value: =0.00195% CI: [1.05, 4.2]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Dietary Fiber Intake in Grams (Transformed Using the Natural Log)

Comparison of the dietary fiber intake in grams trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups. Because of the severe kurtosis and skewness present in this outcome, a transformation (using the natural log) was undertaken to better meet the assumptions of the analysis. Thus, the trajectory differences between arms were formally tested using the log of the dietary fiber intake in grams and back transforming the least square mean estimates from this model will not result in the least square means in the original metric. We performed a sensitivity analysis using the untransformed dietary fiber intake in grams, and that model exhibited poorer model fit. We can present the crude, observed means, or the least square means from the model using the untransformed dietary fiber intake in grams if it is of greater priority to have more direct interpretability of the dietary fiber intake in grams values than using the model that better meets the statistical assumptions.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralDietary Fiber Intake in Grams (Transformed Using the Natural Log)Baseline3.15 natural log of fiber intake in grams
BehavioralDietary Fiber Intake in Grams (Transformed Using the Natural Log)6 months2.87 natural log of fiber intake in grams
BehavioralDietary Fiber Intake in Grams (Transformed Using the Natural Log)12 months2.87 natural log of fiber intake in grams
BehavioralDietary Fiber Intake in Grams (Transformed Using the Natural Log)18 months2.87 natural log of fiber intake in grams
Enhanced Usual CareDietary Fiber Intake in Grams (Transformed Using the Natural Log)18 months2.90 natural log of fiber intake in grams
Enhanced Usual CareDietary Fiber Intake in Grams (Transformed Using the Natural Log)Baseline3.01 natural log of fiber intake in grams
Enhanced Usual CareDietary Fiber Intake in Grams (Transformed Using the Natural Log)12 months2.90 natural log of fiber intake in grams
Enhanced Usual CareDietary Fiber Intake in Grams (Transformed Using the Natural Log)6 months2.90 natural log of fiber intake in grams
p-value: 0.00895% CI: [0.05, 0.302]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Fasting Blood Glucose (Fbg; Transformed Using the Inverse Square, or 1/Fbg in mg/dl^2 )

Comparison of fasting blood glucose trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups. Because of the severe kurtosis and skewness present in this outcome, a transformation (using the inverse square, or 1/fasting blood glucose in mg/dl\^2) was undertaken to better meet the assumptions of the analysis. Thus, the trajectory differences between arms were formally tested using the inverse square of fasting blood glucose, and back transforming the least square mean estimates from this model will not result in the least square means in the original metric. We performed a sensitivity analysis using the untransformed fasting blood glucose, and that model exhibited poorer model fit. We can present the crude, observed means, or the least square means from the model using the untransformed fasting blood glucose if it is of greater priority to have more direct interpretability of the fasting blood glucose values than using the model that better meets the statistical assumptions.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralFasting Blood Glucose (Fbg; Transformed Using the Inverse Square, or 1/Fbg in mg/dl^2 )Baseline.0000699 inverse square of fbg mg/dl
BehavioralFasting Blood Glucose (Fbg; Transformed Using the Inverse Square, or 1/Fbg in mg/dl^2 )6 months.0000699 inverse square of fbg mg/dl
BehavioralFasting Blood Glucose (Fbg; Transformed Using the Inverse Square, or 1/Fbg in mg/dl^2 )12 months.0000695 inverse square of fbg mg/dl
BehavioralFasting Blood Glucose (Fbg; Transformed Using the Inverse Square, or 1/Fbg in mg/dl^2 )18 months.0000685 inverse square of fbg mg/dl
Enhanced Usual CareFasting Blood Glucose (Fbg; Transformed Using the Inverse Square, or 1/Fbg in mg/dl^2 )18 months.0000692 inverse square of fbg mg/dl
Enhanced Usual CareFasting Blood Glucose (Fbg; Transformed Using the Inverse Square, or 1/Fbg in mg/dl^2 )Baseline.0000668 inverse square of fbg mg/dl
Enhanced Usual CareFasting Blood Glucose (Fbg; Transformed Using the Inverse Square, or 1/Fbg in mg/dl^2 )12 months.0000676 inverse square of fbg mg/dl
Enhanced Usual CareFasting Blood Glucose (Fbg; Transformed Using the Inverse Square, or 1/Fbg in mg/dl^2 )6 months.000067 inverse square of fbg mg/dl
p-value: 0.2995% CI: [-16, 4.73]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Hemoglobin HbA1c % (Transformed Using the Inverse Cube, or 1/HbAlc%^3)

Comparison of hemoglobin HbA1c trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups. Because of the severe kurtosis and skewness present in this outcome, a transformation (using the inverse cube, or 1/HbAlc%\^3) was undertaken to better meet the assumptions of the analysis. Thus, the trajectory differences between arms were formally tested using the inverse cube of HbA1c, and back transforming the least square mean estimates from this model will not result in the least square means in the original metric. We performed a sensitivity analysis using the untransformed HbA1c, and that model exhibited poorer model fit. We can present the crude, observed means, or the least square means from the model using the untransformed HbA1c if it is of greater priority to have more direct interpretability of the HbA1c values than using the model that better meets the statistical assumptions.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months from enrollment

Population: Analysis limited to data available at different time points (6, 12, 18). As participants were required to come in to the clinic to collect their data it was challenging to get follow up data.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralHemoglobin HbA1c % (Transformed Using the Inverse Cube, or 1/HbAlc%^3)Baseline.00448 inverse cube of HbA1c percentage
BehavioralHemoglobin HbA1c % (Transformed Using the Inverse Cube, or 1/HbAlc%^3)6 Months.00445 inverse cube of HbA1c percentage
BehavioralHemoglobin HbA1c % (Transformed Using the Inverse Cube, or 1/HbAlc%^3)12 months.00437 inverse cube of HbA1c percentage
BehavioralHemoglobin HbA1c % (Transformed Using the Inverse Cube, or 1/HbAlc%^3)18 months.00424 inverse cube of HbA1c percentage
Enhanced Usual CareHemoglobin HbA1c % (Transformed Using the Inverse Cube, or 1/HbAlc%^3)18 months.00397 inverse cube of HbA1c percentage
Enhanced Usual CareHemoglobin HbA1c % (Transformed Using the Inverse Cube, or 1/HbAlc%^3)Baseline.00445 inverse cube of HbA1c percentage
Enhanced Usual CareHemoglobin HbA1c % (Transformed Using the Inverse Cube, or 1/HbAlc%^3)12 months.00423 inverse cube of HbA1c percentage
Enhanced Usual CareHemoglobin HbA1c % (Transformed Using the Inverse Cube, or 1/HbAlc%^3)6 Months.00439 inverse cube of HbA1c percentage
p-value: 0.0695% CI: [-2e-8, 0.00000137]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Number of Fruit Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)

Comparison of number fruit servings per day trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups. Because of the severe kurtosis and skewness present in this outcome, a transformation (using the natural log) was undertaken to better meet the assumptions of the analysis. Thus, the trajectory differences between arms were formally tested using the log of the number of fruit servings per day, and back transforming the least square mean estimates from this model will not result in the least square means in the original metric. We performed a sensitivity analysis using the untransformed number of fruit servings per day, and that model exhibited poorer model fit. We can present the crude, observed means, or the least square means from the model using the untransformed number of fruit servings per day if it is of greater priority to have more direct interpretability of the # of fruit servings per day values than using the model that better meets the statistical assumptions.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralNumber of Fruit Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)Baseline.637 natural log of fruit servings per day
BehavioralNumber of Fruit Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)6 months.522 natural log of fruit servings per day
BehavioralNumber of Fruit Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)12 months.406 natural log of fruit servings per day
BehavioralNumber of Fruit Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)18 months.291 natural log of fruit servings per day
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Fruit Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)18 months.423 natural log of fruit servings per day
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Fruit Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)Baseline.511 natural log of fruit servings per day
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Fruit Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)12 months.456 natural log of fruit servings per day
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Fruit Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)6 months.483 natural log of fruit servings per day
p-value: 0.195% CI: [-0.032, 0.003]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Number of Kilocalories

Comparison of the number of kilocalories trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralNumber of Kilocalories12 months1215 kilocalories
BehavioralNumber of KilocaloriesBaseline1546 kilocalories
BehavioralNumber of Kilocalories18 months1049 kilocalories
BehavioralNumber of Kilocalories6 months1381 kilocalories
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Kilocalories18 months1135 kilocalories
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Kilocalories12 months1234 kilocalories
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Kilocalories6 months1333 kilocalories
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of KilocaloriesBaseline1431 kilocalories
p-value: 0.0795% CI: [-23, 0.7]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Number of Vegetable Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)

Comparison of the dietary intake of the number of vegetable servings per day trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups. Because of the severe kurtosis and skewness present in this outcome, a transformation (using the natural log) was undertaken to better meet the assumptions of the analysis. Thus, the trajectory differences between arms were formally tested using the log of the number of vegetable servings per day, and back transforming the least square mean estimates from this model will not result in the least square means in the original metric. We performed a sensitivity analysis using the untransformed outcome, and that model exhibited poorer model fit. We can present the crude, observed means, or the least square means from the model using the untransformed number of vegetable servings per day if it is of greater priority to have more direct interpretability of the outcome values than using the model that better meets the statistical assumptions.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralNumber of Vegetable Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)Baseline1.37 natural log of vegetable servings / day
BehavioralNumber of Vegetable Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)12 months1.22 natural log of vegetable servings / day
BehavioralNumber of Vegetable Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)6 months1.30 natural log of vegetable servings / day
BehavioralNumber of Vegetable Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)18 months1.15 natural log of vegetable servings / day
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Vegetable Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)6 months1.20 natural log of vegetable servings / day
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Vegetable Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)Baseline1.27 natural log of vegetable servings / day
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Vegetable Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)18 months1.05 natural log of vegetable servings / day
Enhanced Usual CareNumber of Vegetable Servings Per Day (Transformed Using the Natural Log)12 months1.13 natural log of vegetable servings / day
p-value: 0.9995% CI: [-0.013, 0.013]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Saturated Fat Intake as Percentage of Total Energy Intake

Comparison of the saturated fat intake as percentage of total energy intake trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralSaturated Fat Intake as Percentage of Total Energy IntakeBaseline9.13 Percentage of total energy
BehavioralSaturated Fat Intake as Percentage of Total Energy Intake6 months8.80 Percentage of total energy
BehavioralSaturated Fat Intake as Percentage of Total Energy Intake12 months8.47 Percentage of total energy
BehavioralSaturated Fat Intake as Percentage of Total Energy Intake18 months8.14 Percentage of total energy
Enhanced Usual CareSaturated Fat Intake as Percentage of Total Energy Intake18 months8.14 Percentage of total energy
Enhanced Usual CareSaturated Fat Intake as Percentage of Total Energy IntakeBaseline9.40 Percentage of total energy
Enhanced Usual CareSaturated Fat Intake as Percentage of Total Energy Intake12 months8.56 Percentage of total energy
Enhanced Usual CareSaturated Fat Intake as Percentage of Total Energy Intake6 months8.98 Percentage of total energy
p-value: 0.595% CI: [-0.029, 0.059]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Sugar Intake in Grams

Comparison of the sugar intake in grams trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralSugar Intake in GramsBaseline79.9 grams
BehavioralSugar Intake in Grams6 months70.2 grams
BehavioralSugar Intake in Grams12 months60.5 grams
BehavioralSugar Intake in Grams18 months50.8 grams
Enhanced Usual CareSugar Intake in Grams18 months54.8 grams
Enhanced Usual CareSugar Intake in GramsBaseline72.6 grams
Enhanced Usual CareSugar Intake in Grams12 months60.8 grams
Enhanced Usual CareSugar Intake in Grams6 months66.7 grams
p-value: 0.1295% CI: [-1.41, 0.16]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Total Cholesterol

Comparison of total cholesterol trajectories between the intervention and usual-care control groups.

Time frame: Baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)
BehavioralTotal Cholesterol6 months199.5 mg/dl
BehavioralTotal Cholesterol12 months203.5 mg/dl
BehavioralTotal Cholesterol18 months207.4 mg/dl
BehavioralTotal CholesterolBaseline195.6 mg/dl
Enhanced Usual CareTotal Cholesterol18 months197.5 mg/dl
Enhanced Usual CareTotal Cholesterol6 months193.8 mg/dl
Enhanced Usual CareTotal CholesterolBaseline191.9 mg/dl
Enhanced Usual CareTotal Cholesterol12 months195.6 mg/dl
p-value: 0.2795% CI: [-0.277, 0.978]Mixed Models Analysis
Other Pre-specified

Average Program Cost Per Participant

Average cost per participant of the De Por Vida intervention and enhanced usual care

Time frame: 12 months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BehavioralAverage Program Cost Per Participant360.68 DollarsStandard Deviation 63.01
Enhanced Usual CareAverage Program Cost Per Participant0 DollarsStandard Deviation 0
Other Pre-specified

Recruit Participants for Sustainability Phase

Number of participants recruited

Time frame: Post-intervention for 12 months

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
BehavioralRecruit Participants for Sustainability Phase30 Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 16, 2026