Cited by 562Behavioral Health and InterventionsMedia Influence and HealthHealth Policy Implementation Science

Does theory influence the effectiveness of health behavior interventions? Meta-analysis

Open access
Prestwich, Andrew, Sniehotta, Falko F., Whittington, Craig, Dombrowski, Stephan U., Rogers, Lizzie, Michie, Susan·2014·Health Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To systematically investigate the extent and type of theory use in physical activity and dietary interventions, as well as associations between extent and type of theory use with intervention effectiveness. METHODS: An in-depth analysis of studies included in two systematic reviews of physical activity and healthy eating interventions (k = 190). Extent and type of theory use was assessed using the Theory Coding Scheme (TCS) and intervention effectiveness was calculated using Hedges's g. Metaregressions assessed the relationships between these measures. RESULTS: Fifty-six percent of interventions reported a theory base. Of these, 90% did not report links between all of their behavior change techniques (BCTs) with specific theoretical constructs and 91% did not report links between all the specified constructs with BCTs. The associations between a composite score or specific items on the TCS and intervention effectiveness were inconsistent. Interventions based on Social Cognitive Theory or the Transtheoretical Model were similarly effective and no more effective than interventions not reporting a theory base. CONCLUSIONS: The coding of theory in these studies suggested that theory was not often used extensively in the development of interventions. Moreover, the relationships between type of theory used and the extent of theory use with effectiveness were generally weak. The findings suggest that attempts to apply the two theories commonly used in this review more extensively are unlikely to increase intervention effectiveness.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0032853

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • While psychosocial theories such as SCT, SLT, and TPB were most commonly used to inform the interventions, these interventions did not incorporate behaviour change taxonomy technique (BCTT).

    “While psychosocial theories, such as SCT, SLT, and TPB were most commonly used to inform the interventions, these interventions did not incorporate behaviour change taxonomy technique (BCTT) [64, 65].”

    From School-based healthy eating interventions for adolescents aged 10–19 years: an umbrella review (2024) · cites this paper as [65]

    The Discussion (p. 17) identifies SCT and TTM as prominent theories in the interventions, but does not identify SLT and TPB as among the most commonly used. The Data Extraction section (p. 8) records behaviour change techniques used; neither it nor the other passages establishes that the interventions did not incorporate a BCT taxonomy. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Literature suggests using BCTT with behaviour change theories and frameworks, such as goal setting theory, TTM, TRA, and COM-B framework, for more effective and sustainable behaviour change.

    “Literature suggests using BCTT with behaviour change theories and frameworks, such as goal setting theory, TTM, TRA, and Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) framework, for more effective and sustainable behaviour change [64–67].”

    From School-based healthy eating interventions for adolescents aged 10–19 years: an umbrella review (2024) · cites this paper as [65]

    The Theory and Interventions section (p. 5) says theory can guide the selection of behavior change techniques and that more extensive theory use could improve effectiveness. But the Discussion (p. 15) reports that most analyses found no association between theory use and effectiveness. The paper does not establish sustainable change or support the listed frameworks as a group, so it does not support the sentence’s broader recommendation. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • BCTTv1 has been used by systematic reviewers to identify BCTs within intervention papers, in order to facilitate intervention comparison and evaluate technique efficacy.

    “BCTTv1 has also been used by systematic reviewers to identify BCTs within intervention papers, in order to facilitate intervention comparison and evaluate technique efficacy (e.g. [42–47]).”
  • Systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses have examined the association between BCTs and theory.

    “Systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses have also examined the association between BCTs and theory [45], explored which BCTs are most effective in changing particular mechanisms of action, such as self-efficacy [76–79], and measured the overall effect of mechanisms of action, e.g. a change in intention on behaviour [80].”
  • A recent meta-analysis found that BCIs are often not designed on a clear theoretical foundation; only 22.5% of 235 implementation studies explicitly used theories of behaviour change, and the majority of those doing so gave no clear explanation for why the selected theories had been used.

    “However, a recent meta-analysis found that BCIs are often not designed on a clear theoretical foundation; for example, only 22.5% of 235 implementation studies explicitly used theories of behaviour change 58,59 and the majority of those doing so gave no clear explanation for why the selected theories had been used.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
  2. Hedges, L.V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando: Academic Press.
  3. Michie, S., Whittington, C., Hamoudi, Z., Zarnani, F., Tober, G., & West, R. (in press). Identification of behaviour change techniques to reduce excessive alcohol use and their associations with outcome. Addiction.
  4. Roe, L., Hunt, P., Bradshaw, H., & Rayner, M. (1997). Health promotion interventions to promote healthy eating in the general population: A review. London, Health Education Authority.
  5. Swann, C.J., Bowe, K., McCormick, G., & Kosmin, M. (2003). Teenage pregnancy and parenthood: A review of reviews. London: Health Development Agency.
  6. Wingood, G. M., & DiClemente, R. (1996). HIV sexual interventions for women: A review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 12 , 209-217.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prestwich, A., Sniehotta, F. F., Whittington, C., Dombrowski, S. U., Rogers, L., & Michie, S.
Affiliations
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
Venue
Health Psychology
Published
2014-05
Volume
33
Issue
5
Pages
465-474
ISSN
  • 0278-6133 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-7810
OpenAlex
W1987684330
Cited by
562
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 50 · 2022: 53 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 98 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 2
FWCI
48.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council
  • Fuse, the Centre for Translational Research in Public Health
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Media Influence and Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
health behavior interventions, theory application, intervention effectiveness, behaviour change techniques, social cognitive theory, transtheoretical model, physical activity interventions, dietary intervention, healthy eating interventions, theory-based intervention development
MeSH terms
Diet, Health Promotion, Humans, Motor Activity, Psychological Theory, Program Evaluation, Health Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review