The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Mediated Health Communication Campaigns on Behavior Change in the United States
Abstract
A meta-analysis was performed of studies of mediated health campaigns in the United States in order to examine the effects of the campaigns on behavior change. Mediated health campaigns have small measurable effects in the short-term. Campaign effect sizes varied by the type of behavior: r=.15 for seat belt use, r=.13 for oral health, r=.09 for alcohol use reduction, r=.05 for heart disease prevention, r=.05 for smoking, r=.04 for mammography and cervical cancer screening, and r=.04 for sexual behaviors. Campaigns with an enforcement component were more effective than those without. To predict campaign effect sizes for topics other than those listed above, researchers can take into account whether the behavior in a cessation campaign was addictive, and whether the campaign promoted the commencement of a new behavior, versus cessation of an old behavior, or prevention of a new undesirable behavior. Given the small campaign effect sizes, campaign planners should set modest goals for future campaigns. The results can also be useful to evaluators as a benchmark for campaign effects and to help estimate necessary sample size.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change.
Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1983) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.51.3.390 · Cited by 9,098
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
Ennett, S. T., Tobler, N. S., Ringwalt, C. L., & Flewelling, R. L. (1994) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.84.9.1394 · Cited by 655
A meta-analysis of smoking prevention programs after adjustment for errors in the unit of analysis
Rooney, B. L., & Murray, D. M. (1996) · Health Education Quarterly · doi:10.1177/109019819602300104 · Cited by 254
Cited by
Use of mass media campaigns to change health behaviour
Wakefield, M. A., Loken, B., & Hornik, R. C. (2010) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60809-4 · Cited by 2,485
Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions
Dietz, T., Gardner, G. T., Gilligan, J., Stern, P. C., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0908738106 · Cited by 1,450
Impact of narratives on persuasion in health communication: a meta-analysis
Shen, F., Sheer, V. C., & Li, R. (2015) · Journal of Advertising · doi:10.1080/00913367.2015.1018467 · Cited by 574
Media effects: theory and research
Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., & Walther, J. B. (2016) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033608 · Cited by 536
Early Childhood Obesity Prevention Policies
(2011) · doi:10.17226/13124 · Cited by 452
Metadata
- Authors
- SNYDER, L. B., HAMILTON, M. A., MITCHELL, E. W., KIWANUKA-TONDO, J., FLEMING-MILICI, F., & PROCTOR, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Health Communication
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2004-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- sup1
- Pages
- 71-96
- ISSN
- 1081-0730 (ISSN-L)
- 1087-0415
- OpenAlex
- W2143363325
- Cited by
- 535
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 133.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Mediated Health Communication Campaigns on Behavior Change in the United States. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10810730490271548
- The paper
- SNYDER, L. B., HAMILTON, M. A., MITCHELL, E. W., KIWANUKA-TONDO, J., FLEMING-MILICI, F., & PROCTOR, D. (2004). A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Mediated Health Communication Campaigns on Behavior Change in the United States. Journal of Health Communication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730490271548
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.