Dataset Information

Can Communicating Personalised Disease Risk Promote Healthy Behaviour Change? A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The assessment and communication of disease risk that is personalised to the individual is widespread in healthcare contexts. Despite several systematic reviews of RCTs, it is unclear under what circumstances that personalised risk estimates promotes change in four key health-related behaviours: smoking, physical activity, diet and alcohol consumption.

Purpose

The present research aims to systematically identify, evaluate and synthesise the findings of existing systematic reviews.

Methods

This systematic review of systematic reviews followed published guidance. A search of four databases and two-stage screening procedure with good reliability identified nine eligible systematic reviews.

Results

The nine reviews each included between three and 15 primary studies, containing 36 unique studies. Methods of personalising risk feedback included imaging/visual feedback, genetic testing, and numerical estimation from risk algorithms. The reviews were generally high quality. For a broad range of methods of estimating and communicating risk, the reviews found no evidence that risk information had strong or consistent effects on health-related behaviours. The most promising effects came from interventions using visual or imaging techniques and with smoking cessation and dietary behaviour as outcomes, but with inconsistent results. Few interventions explicitly used theory, few targeted self-efficacy or response efficacy, and a limited range of Behaviour Change Techniques were used.

Conclusions

Presenting risk information on its own, even when highly personalised, does not produce strong effects on health-related behaviours or changes which are sustained. Future research in this area should build on the existing knowledge base about increasing the effects of risk communication on behaviour.

SUBMITTER: French DP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5602036 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can Communicating Personalised Disease Risk Promote Healthy Behaviour Change? A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.

French David P DP Cameron Elaine E Benton Jack S JS Deaton Christi C Harvie Michelle M

Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine 20171001 5

<h4>Background</h4>The assessment and communication of disease risk that is personalised to the individual is widespread in healthcare contexts. Despite several systematic reviews of RCTs, it is unclear under what circumstances that personalised risk estimates promotes change in four key health-related behaviours: smoking, physical activity, diet and alcohol consumption.<h4>Purpose</h4>The present research aims to systematically identify, evaluate and synthesise the findings of existing systemat ...[more]

PMID: 28290066

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundApproximately 40% of cancers could be prevented if people lived healthier lifestyles. We have developed a theory-based brief intervention to share personalised cancer risk information and promote behaviour change within primary care. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of incorporating this intervention into primary care consultations.MethodPatients eligible for an NHS Health Check or annual chronic disease review at five general practices were invited to participate in a non-randomised pilot study. In addition to the NHS Health Check or chronic disease review, those receiving the intervention were provided with their estimated risk of developing the most common preventable cancers alongside tailored behaviour change advice. Patients completed online questionnaires at baseline, immediately post-consultation and at 3-month follow-up. Consultations were audio/video recorded. Patients (n = 12) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) (n = 7) participated in post-intervention qualitative interviews that were analysed using thematic analysis.Results62 patients took part. Thirty-four attended for an NHS Health Check plus the intervention; 7 for a standard NHS Health Check; 16 for a chronic disease review plus the intervention; and 5 for a standard chronic disease review. The mean time for delivery of the intervention was 9.6 min (SD 3) within NHS Health Checks and 9 min (SD 4) within chronic disease reviews. Fidelity of delivery of the intervention was high. Data from the questionnaires demonstrates potential improvements in health-related behaviours following the intervention. Patients receiving the intervention found the cancer risk information and lifestyle advice understandable, useful and motivating. HCPs felt that the intervention fitted well within NHS Health Checks and facilitated conversations around behaviour change. Integrating the intervention within chronic disease reviews was more challenging.ConclusionsIncorporating a risk-based intervention to promote behaviour change for cancer prevention into primary care consultations is feasible and acceptable to both patients and HCPs. A randomised trial is now needed to assess the effect on health behaviours. When designing that trial, and other prevention activities within primary care, it is necessary to consider challenges around patient recruitment, the HCP contact time needed for delivery of interventions, and how best to integrate discussions about disease risk within routine care.

Project description:BackgroundWhether behaviour change interventions are effective for the maintenance of older migrants' health and well-being is uncertain. A systematic review was conducted to assess evidence for the capacity of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to promote the health and well-being of older migrants.MethodsElectronic databases (Cochrane CENTRAL, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science) were searched systematically to identify relevant randomised controlled trials, pre-post studies and quasi-experimental studies published before March 2021. Additional articles were identified through citation tracking. Studies examining BCTs used to promote the health and/or well-being of older migrants were eligible. Two independent reviewers used the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy version 1 to extract data on BCTs. Data on intervention functions (IFs) and cultural adaption strategies were also extracted. Intervention contents (BCTs, IFs, culture adaption strategies) were compared across effective and ineffective interventions according to health and well-being outcome clusters (anthropometrics, health behaviour, physical functioning, mental health and cognitive functioning, social functioning and generic health and well-being).ResultsForty-three studies (23 randomised controlled trials, 13 pre-post studies and 7 quasi-experimental studies) reporting on 39 interventions met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen BCTs were identified as promising for at least one outcome cluster: goal-setting (behaviour), problem-solving, behavioural contract, self-monitoring of behaviour, social support (unspecified), instruction on how to perform the behaviour, information about health consequences, information about social and environmental consequences, demonstration of the behaviour, social comparison, behavioural practice/rehearsal, generalisation of a target behaviour and addition of objects to the environment. Three BCTs (instruction on how to perform the behaviour, demonstration of the behaviour, and social comparison) and two IFs (modelling and training) were identified as promising for all outcome clusters.ConclusionsThirteen distinct BCTs are promising for use in future interventions to optimise health and well-being among older migrants. Future research should focus on the effectiveness of these BCTs (combinations) in various contexts and among different subgroups of older migrants, as well as the mechanisms through which they act. Given the scarcity of interventions in which cultural adaption has been taken into account, future behavioural change interventions should consider cultural appropriateness for various older migrant (sub)groups.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42018112859.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding the barriers and facilitators to behaviour change by primary care practitioners (PCPs) is vital to inform the design and implementation of successful Behaviour Change Interventions (BCIs), embed evidence-based medicine into routine clinical practice, and improve quality of care and population health outcomes.MethodsA theory-led systematic review of reviews examining barriers and facilitators to clinical behaviour change by PCPs in high-income primary care contexts using PRISMA. Embase, MEDLINE, PsychInfo, HMIC and Cochrane Library were searched. Content and framework analysis was used to map reported barriers and facilitators to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and describe emergent themes. Intervention functions and policy categories to change behaviour associated with these domains were identified using the COM-B Model and Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW).ResultsFour thousand three hundred eighty-eight reviews were identified. Nineteen were included. The average quality score was 7.5/11. Reviews infrequently used theory to structure their methods or interpret their findings. Barriers and facilitators most frequently identified as important were principally related to 'Knowledge', 'Environmental context and resources' and 'Social influences' TDF domains. These fall under the 'Capability' and 'Opportunity' domains of COM-B, and are linked with interventions related to education, training, restriction, environmental restructuring and enablement. From this, three key areas for policy change include guidelines, regulation and legislation. Factors least frequently identified as important were related to 'Motivation' and other psychological aspects of 'Capability' of COM-B. Based on this, BCW intervention functions of persuasion, incentivisation, coercion and modelling may be perceived as less relevant by PCPs to change behaviour.ConclusionsPCPs commonly perceive barriers and facilitators to behaviour change related to the 'Capability' and 'Opportunity' domains of COM-B. PCPs may lack insight into the role that 'Motivation' and aspects of psychological 'Capability' have in behaviour change and/or that research methods have been inadequate to capture their function. Future research should apply theory-based frameworks and appropriate design methods to explore these factors. With no 'one size fits all' intervention, these findings provide general, transferable insights into how to approach changing clinical behaviour by PCPs, based on their own views on the barriers and facilitators to behaviour change.Systematic review registrationA protocol was submitted to the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine via the Ethics and CARE form submission on 16.4.2020, ref number 21478 (available on request). The project was not registered on PROSPERO.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the impact of communicating DNA based disease risk estimates on risk-reducing health behaviours and motivation to engage in such behaviours.DesignSystematic review with meta-analysis, using Cochrane methods.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to 25 February 2015. Backward and forward citation searches were also conducted.Study selectionRandomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials involving adults in which one group received personalised DNA based estimates of disease risk for conditions where risk could be reduced by behaviour change. Eligible studies included a measure of risk-reducing behaviour.ResultsWe examined 10,515 abstracts and included 18 studies that reported on seven behavioural outcomes, including smoking cessation (six studies; n=2663), diet (seven studies; n=1784), and physical activity (six studies; n=1704). Meta-analysis revealed no significant effects of communicating DNA based risk estimates on smoking cessation (odds ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 1.35, P=0.67), diet (standardised mean difference 0.12, 95% confidence interval -0.00 to 0.24, P=0.05), or physical activity (standardised mean difference -0.03, 95% confidence interval -0.13 to 0.08, P=0.62). There were also no effects on any other behaviours (alcohol use, medication use, sun protection behaviours, and attendance at screening or behavioural support programmes) or on motivation to change behaviour, and no adverse effects, such as depression and anxiety. Subgroup analyses provided no clear evidence that communication of a risk-conferring genotype affected behaviour more than communication of the absence of such a genotype. However, studies were predominantly at high or unclear risk of bias, and evidence was typically of low quality.ConclusionsExpectations that communicating DNA based risk estimates changes behaviour is not supported by existing evidence. These results do not support use of genetic testing or the search for risk-conferring gene variants for common complex diseases on the basis that they motivate risk-reducing behaviour.Systematic review registrationThis is a revised and updated version of a Cochrane review from 2010, adding 11 studies to the seven previously identified.

Project description:To summarise evidence on the effectiveness of behaviour change interventions to encourage prescribing of generic forms of prescription drugs where clinically appropriate in the UK National Health Service (NHS) and similar settings.Systematic review.We conducted a rapid evidence synthesis in two stages: First, we searched databases, such as the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), for systematic reviews of interventions that reported outcomes related to utilisation of generic drugs. In the second stage, we searched several databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify primary studies of any interventions not covered by systematic reviews.Data were extracted into a standardised data extraction form. Standardised quality assessment tools were used to assess study quality. Two reviewers were involved in data extraction and quality assessment.10 reviews were included for the initial evidence synthesis, but most were of limited usefulness to our focused review question. One review evaluated the effect of prescribing policies using financial incentives and showed an increase in generic prescribing. Thirteen primary studies of other interventions were included for the rapid review. Two studies showed an increase in percentage of overall generic prescribing with an educational intervention; two studies showed an improvement in generic prescribing rates when physicians collaborated with pharmacists, though in one study this was not statistically significant; two US studies showed improvements in generic prescribing with electronic prescribing. Five out of seven studies showed positive results with multifaceted interventions.The existing evidence remains insufficient to determine which behaviour change intervention or combination of interventions is most effective due to methodological weaknesses and conflicting results. Based on the evidence, financial incentives with educational intervention and audit/feedback look promising but decision-makers should take into account the practicality and costs of the interventions before implementation.

Project description:BackgroundThe challenge of addressing unhealthy lifestyle choice is of global concern. Motivational Interviewing has been widely implemented to help people change their behaviour, but it is unclear for whom it is most beneficial. This overview aims to appraise and synthesise the review evidence for the effectiveness of Motivational Interviewing on health behaviour of adults in health and social care settings.MethodsA systematic review of reviews. Methods were pre-specified and documented in a protocol (PROSPERO-CRD42016049278). We systematically searched 7 electronic databases: CDSR; DARE; PROSPERO; MEDLINE; CINAHL; AMED and PsycINFO from 2000 to May 2018. Two reviewers applied pre-defined selection criteria, extracted data using TIDIER guidelines and assessed methodological quality using the ROBIS tool. We used GRADE criteria to rate the strength of the evidence for reviews including meta-analyses.FindingsSearches identified 5222 records. One hundred and four reviews, including 39 meta-analyses met the inclusion criteria. Most meta-analysis evidence was graded as low or very low (128/155). Moderate quality evidence for mainly short term (<6 months) statistically significant small beneficial effects of Motivational Interviewing were found in 11 of 155 (7%) of meta-analysis comparisons. These outcomes include reducing binge drinking, frequency and quantity of alcohol consumption, substance abuse in people with dependency or addiction, and increasing physical activity participation.ConclusionsWe have created a comprehensive map of reviews relating to Motivational Interviewing to signpost stakeholders to the best available evidence. More high quality research is needed to be confident about the effectiveness of Motivational Interviewing. We identified a large volume of low quality evidence and many areas of overlapping research. To avoid research waste, it is vital for researchers to be aware of existing research, and the implications arising from that research. In the case of Motivational Interviewing issues relating to monitoring and reporting fidelity of interventions need to be addressed.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Health-promoting lifestyle behaviours are part of the activities of daily living that influence individual happiness, values and well-being. They play a crucial role in prevention and control of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) among all age groups. Current statistics on mortality, disability and morbidity associated with NCDs are alarming globally. The use of information and communication technology (ICT) for a health-promoting lifestyle behaviour programme enhances health behaviours that are important in the prevention and control of both communicable and non-communicable diseases. Our study aimed to map evidence on the use of ICT in comprehensive health-promoting lifestyle behaviour among healthy adults. METHODS:Eleven electronic databases were searched for the study. We included studies published in English between January 2007 and December 2018 reporting on healthy adults, ICT and any subscales of the health-promoting lifestyle profile (HPLP). Studies focusing on diseases or disease management and studies that combine monitoring tools in the form of hardware (accelerometer or pedometer) with ICT or computer games were excluded. Data were summarised numerically and thematically. RESULTS:All the studies reviewed were conducted in developed countries. Most of the studies reported on physical activity, and findings of one study covered all the subscales of HPLP. The use of ICT for health-promoting lifestyle behaviours was reported to be effective in ensuring health behaviours that can improve physical and mental health. CONCLUSION:Our findings showed that there is a dearth of knowledge on comprehensive health-promoting lifestyle behaviour that can be beneficial for the control and prevention of NCDs. There is a need to carry out primary studies on the use of ICT and comprehensive health-promoting lifestyle, especially among adults in low-income and middle-income countries where there are alarming statistics for mortality and disability associated with NCDs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42016042568.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide. Lifestyle choices play an important role in the aetiology of cancer with up to 4 in 10 cases potentially preventable. Interventions delivered by healthcare professionals (HCPs) that incorporate risk information have the potential to promote behaviour change. Our aim was to develop a very brief intervention incorporating cancer risk, which could be implemented within primary care. METHODS:Guided by normalisation process theory (NPT), we developed a prototype intervention using literature reviews, consultation with patient and public representatives and pilot work with patients and HCPs. We conducted focus groups and interviews with 65 HCPs involved in delivering prevention activities. Findings were used to refine the intervention before 22 HCPs completed an online usability test and provided further feedback via a questionnaire incorporating a modified version of the NoMAD checklist. RESULTS:The intervention included a website where individuals could provide information on lifestyle risk factors view their estimated 10-year risk of developing one or more of the five most common preventable cancers and access lifestyle advice incorporating behaviour change techniques. Changes incorporated from feedback from the focus groups and interviews included signposting to local services and websites, simplified wording and labelling of risk information. In the usability testing, all participants felt it would be easy to collect the risk information. Ninety-one percent felt the intervention would enable discussion about cancer risk and believed it had potential to be easily integrated into National Health Service (NHS) Health Checks. However, only 36% agreed it could be delivered within 5 min. CONCLUSIONS:With the use of NPT, we developed a very brief intervention that is acceptable to HCPs in primary care and could be potentially integrated into NHS Health Checks. However, further work is needed to assess its feasibility and potential effectiveness.

Dataset Information

Can Communicating Personalised Disease Risk Promote Healthy Behaviour Change? A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.

Background

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Can Communicating Personalised Disease Risk Promote Healthy Behaviour Change? A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets