Fidelity of delivery of a physical activity intervention: Predictors and consequences
Abstract
Assessing fidelity of behavioural interventions is important, but demanding and rarely done. This study assessed adherence to behaviour change techniques used in an intervention to increase physical activity among sedentary adults ( ProActive ; N = 365). Transcripts of 108 sessions with a sub-sample of 27 participants were assessed. An independent assessor coded adherence of four 'facilitators' who delivered the intervention to 208 protocol-specified facilitator behaviours (e.g. 'elicit perceived advantages of becoming more active') in four key sessions. Four raters classified the 208 behaviours under 14 techniques (e.g., goal setting, use of rewards) to enable calculation of adherence to techniques. Observed adherence to techniques across participants was modest (median 44%, IQR 35-62%), and lower than that reported by facilitators. Adherence differed between facilitators (range: 26-63%) and decreased across the four sessions (mean drop 9% per session, 95% confidence interval 7-11%). In this small sample facilitator adherence was unrelated to (change in) participants' physical activity or its cognitive predictors: Attitudes, subjective norm, perceived behavioural control and intention. Future research should investigate causal pathways between fidelity indicators and outcomes in larger samples and develop and test less intensive measures of fidelity.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Information about the extent to which the delivered intervention varied from the intended intervention may help to explain study findings, minimise errors in interpreting study outcomes, inform future modifications to the intervention, and where fidelity is poor, may point to the need for further studies or strategies to improve fidelity or adherence.
“This information may help to explain study findings, minimise errors in interpreting study outcomes, inform future modifications to the intervention, and where fidelity is poor, may point to the need for further studies or strategies to improve fidelity or adherence. 22,23”
From Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide (2014) · cites this paper as [22]
In an intervention to increase physical activity among sedentary adults at risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus delivered by trained and quality-assured facilitators, 58% of BCTs specified in the intervention protocol were not faithfully delivered.
“For example, in an intervention to increase physical activity among sedentary adults at risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus delivered by trained and quality-assured facilitators, 58% of BCTs specified in the intervention protocol were not faithfully delivered.182”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 28 · Cited by 195
- Authors
- Hardeman, W., Michie, S., Fanshawe, T., Prevost, A. T., Mcloughlin, K., & Kinmonth, A. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- University College London (GB)
- Lancaster University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Hardeman, Wendy
- Venue
- Psychology & Health
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-12-14
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 11-24
- ISSN
- 0887-0446 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-8321
- OpenAlex
- W1992546852
- Cited by
- 195
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 55 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 8.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychology and Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
- UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (RDA/01/05/040)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Keywords
- intervention fidelity, behaviour change techniques, physical activity promotion, sedentary adults, proactive intervention, session transcripts, theory of planned behavior
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Behavior Therapy, Delivery of Health Care, Female, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Activity, Psychological Theory, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Guideline Adherence, Sedentary 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