Dataset Information

The effects of health behaviours and beliefs based on message framing among patients with chronic diseases: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The effectiveness of integrating message framing into educational interventions to promote the health behaviour of patients with chronic diseases is still being debated in nursing research. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of educational interventions based on gain and loss frames on the health behaviours and beliefs of patients with chronic diseases and to identify the frame that achieves better outcomes.

Design

The systematic review was based on PRISMA guidelines for comprehensively searching, appraising and synthesising research evidence.

Data sources

We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases for reports published from database inception until 26 March 2021.

Eligibility criteria

Intervention studies, published in English, with adult patients with chronic disease conditions, and with intervention contents involved in the implementation of message framing, were considered. The outcomes were health behaviours or beliefs, such as knowledge, self-efficacy, intention or attitudes.

Data extraction and synthesis

Data extraction and entry were performed using a predesigned data extraction form and assessed independently by two reviewers using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias I.

Results

A total of 11 intervention studies were included. We found that educational intervention based on both gain and loss frames could enhance the positive effects of communication, and promote healthy behaviours and beliefs in patients with chronic disease. Many of the studies we included here showed the advantage of loss framing messages. Due to the limited number of articles included and without quantitative analysis, this result should be interpreted cautiously.

Conclusions

Integrating message framing into health education might be a promising strategy to motivate patients with chronic disease to improve their health behaviours and beliefs. More extensive and well-designed trials are needed to support the conclusions and discuss the effective framing, moderators and mediators of framing.

Prospero registration number

CRD42021250931.

SUBMITTER: Gao R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8739424 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWith the increasing health care burden of cancer, public health organizations are increasingly emphasizing the importance of calling people to engage in long-term prevention and periodical detection. How to best deliver behavioral recommendations and health outcomes in messaging is an important issue.ObjectiveThis study aims to disaggregate the effects of gain-framed and loss-framed messages on cancer prevention and detection behaviors and intentions and attitudes, which has the potential to inform cancer control programs.MethodsA search of three electronic databases (Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed) was conducted for studies published between January 2000 and December 2020. After a good agreement achieved on a sample by two authors, the article selection (κ=0.8356), quality assessment (κ=0.8137), and data extraction (κ=0.9804) were mainly performed by one author. The standardized mean difference (attitude and intention) and the odds ratio (behaviors) were calculated to evaluate the effectiveness of message framing (gain-framed message and loss-framed message). Calculations were conducted, and figures were produced by Review Manager 5.3.ResultsThe title and abstract of 168 unique citations were scanned, of which 53 were included for a full-text review. A total of 24 randomized controlled trials were included, predominantly examining message framing on cancer prevention and detection behavior change interventions. There were 9 studies that used attitude to predict message framing effect and 16 studies that used intention, whereas 6 studies used behavior to examine the message framing effect directly. The use of loss-framed messages improved cancer detection behavior (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.90; P=.001), and the results from subgroup analysis indicated that the effect would be weak with time. No effect of framing was found when effectiveness was assessed by attitudes (prevention: SMD=0.02, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.17; P=.79; detection: SMD=-0.05, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.05; P=.32) or intentions (prevention: SMD=-0.05, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.09; P=.48; detection: SMD=0.02, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.29; P=.92) among studies encouraging cancer prevention and cancer detection.ConclusionsResearch has shown that it is almost impossible to change people's attitudes or intentions about cancer prevention and detection with a gain-framed or loss-framed message. However, loss-framed messages have achieved preliminary success in persuading people to adopt cancer detection behaviors. Future studies could improve the intervention design to achieve better intervention effectiveness.

Project description:BackgroundJoint pain, specifically chronic knee pain (CKP), is a frequent cause of chronic pain and limitation of function and mobility among older adults. Multiple evidence-based guidelines recommend exercise as a first-line treatment for all patients with CKP or knee osteoarthritis (KOA), yet healthcare practitioners' attitudes and beliefs may limit their implementation. This systematic review aims to identify the attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of General Practitioners (GPs) regarding the use of exercise for CKP/KOA.MethodsWe searched four electronic databases between inception and January 2008, using subject headings to identify studies examining the attitudes, beliefs or behaviours of GPs regarding the use of exercise for the treatment of CKP/KOA in adults aged over 45 years in primary care. Studies referring to patellofemoral pain syndrome or CKP secondary to other causes or that occurring in a prosthetic joint were excluded. Once inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, study data were extracted and summarised. Study quality was independently reviewed using two assessment tools.ResultsFrom 2135 potentially relevant articles, 20 were suitable for inclusion. A variety of study methodologies and approaches to measuring attitudes beliefs and behaviours were used among the studies. Quality assessment revealed good reporting of study objective, type, outcome factors and, generally, the sampling frame. However, criticisms included use of small sample sizes, low response rates and under-reporting of non-responder factors. Although 99% of GPs agreed that exercise should be used for CKP/KOA and reported ever providing advice or referring to a physiotherapist, up to 29% believed that rest was the optimum management approach. The frequency of actual provision of exercise advice or physiotherapy referral was lower. Estimates of provision of exercise advice and physiotherapy referral were generally higher for vignette-based studies (exercise advice 9%-89%; physiotherapy referral 44%-77%) than reviews of actual practice (exercise advice 5%-52%; physiotherapy referral 13-63%). Advice to exercise and exercise prescription were not clearly differentiated.ConclusionsAttitudes and beliefs of GPs towards exercise for CKP/KOA vary widely and exercise appears to be underused in the management of CKP/KOA. Limitations of the evidence base include the paucity of studies directly examining attitudes of GPs, poor methodological quality, limited generalisability of results and ambiguity concerning GPs' expected roles. Further investigation is required of the roles of GPs in using exercise as first-line management of CKP/KOA.

Project description:We tested the plausibility of a cognitive-emotional model to understand the effects of messages framed in terms of gain, non-loss, non-gain, and loss, and related to the health consequences of red/processed meat consumption. A total of 544 Italian participants reported their attitude toward reduced red/processed meat consumption and intention to eat red/processed meat (time 1 questionnaire). One week later, participants were randomly assigned to four different message conditions: (a) gain messages focused on the positive health outcomes associated with low meat consumption; (b) non-loss messages focused on the avoided negative health outcomes associated with low meat consumption; (c) non-gain messages focused on the missed positive health outcomes associated with high meat consumption; (d) loss messages focused on the negative health outcomes associated with high meat consumption (message sending). After reading the messages, participants answered a series of questions regarding their emotional and cognitive reactions to the messages, their evaluation of the messages, and again their attitude and intention toward red/processed meat consumption (time 2 questionnaire). Comparing different multivariate linear models under the Bayesian approach, we selected the model with the highest plausibility conditioned to observed data. In this model, message-induced fear influenced systematic processing, which in turn positively influenced message evaluation and attitude, leading to reduced intention to consume red/processed meat. Vice versa, message-induced anger reduced systematic processing, which in turn negatively influenced message evaluation, and led to no effect on attitude and intention. The comparison among message conditions showed that gain and non-loss messages activated integrated emotional and cognitive processing of the health recommendation, while loss and non-gain messages mainly activated emotional shortcuts toward attitude and intention. Overall, these results advance our comprehension of the effects of message framing on receivers' attitudes and intentions.

Project description:BackgroundNational Health Service Health Checks were introduced in 2009 to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risks and events. Since then, national evaluations have highlighted the need to maximise the programme's impact by improving coverage and outputs. To address these challenges it is important to understand the extent to which positive behaviours are influenced across the NHS Health Check pathway and encourage the promotion or minimisation of behavioural facilitators and barriers respectively. This study applied behavioural science frameworks to: i) identify behaviours and actors relevant to uptake, delivery and follow up of NHS Health Checks and influences on these behaviours and; ii) signpost to example intervention content.MethodsA systematic review of studies reporting behaviours related to NHS Health Check-related behaviours of patients, health care professionals (HCPs) and commissioners. Influences on behaviours were coded using theory-based models: COM-B and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Potential intervention types and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were suggested to target key influences.ResultsWe identified 37 studies reporting nine behaviours and influences for eight of these. The most frequently identified influences were physical opportunity including HCPs having space and time to deliver NHS Health Checks and patients having money to adhere to recommendations to change diet and physical activity. Other key influences were motivational, such as beliefs about consequences about the value of NHS Health Checks and behaviour change, and social, such as influences of others on behaviour change. The following techniques are suggested for websites or smartphone apps: Adding objects to the environment, e.g. provide HCPs with electronic schedules to guide timely delivery of Health Checks to target physical opportunity, Social support (unspecified), e.g. include text suggesting patients to ask a colleague to agree in advance to join them in taking the 'healthy option' lunch at work; Information about health consequences, e.g. quotes and/or videos from patients talking about the health benefits of changes they have made.ConclusionsThrough the application of behavioural science we identified key behaviours and their influences which informed recommendations for intervention content. To ascertain the extent to which this reflects existing interventions we recommend a review of relevant evidence.