Cited by 82Behavioral Health and InterventionsSmoking Behavior and CessationHealth and Lifestyle Studies

A theory-based online health behaviour intervention for new university students (U@Uni): results from a randomised controlled trial

Open access
Epton, Tracy, Norman, Paul, Dadzie, Aba-Sah, Harris, Peter R, Webb, Thomas L, Sheeran, Paschal, Julious, Steven A, Ciravegna, Fabio +6 more·2014·BMC Public Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Too few young people engage in behaviours that reduce the risk of morbidity and premature mortality, such as eating healthily, being physically active, drinking sensibly and not smoking. This study sought to assess the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a theory-based online health behaviour intervention (based on self-affirmation theory, the Theory of Planned Behaviour and implementation intentions) targeting these behaviours in new university students, in comparison to a measurement-only control. METHODS: Two-weeks before starting university all incoming undergraduates at the University of Sheffield were invited to take part in a study of new students' health behaviour. A randomised controlled design, with a baseline questionnaire, and two follow-ups (1 and 6 months after starting university), was used to evaluate the intervention. Primary outcomes were measures of the four health behaviours targeted by the intervention at 6-month follow-up, i.e., portions of fruit and vegetables, metabolic equivalent of tasks (physical activity), units of alcohol, and smoking status. RESULTS: The study recruited 1,445 students (intervention n = 736, control n = 709, 58% female, Mean age = 18.9 years), of whom 1,107 completed at least one follow-up (23% attrition). The intervention had a statistically significant effect on one primary outcome, smoking status at 6-month follow-up, with fewer smokers in the intervention arm (8.7%) than in the control arm (13.0%; Odds ratio = 1.92, p = .010). There were no significant intervention effects on the other primary outcomes (physical activity, alcohol or fruit and vegetable consumption) at 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the RCT indicate that the online health behaviour intervention reduced smoking rates, but it had little effect on fruit and vegetable intake, physical activity or alcohol consumption, during the first six months at university. However, engagement with the intervention was low. Further research is needed before strong conclusions can be made regarding the likely effectiveness of the intervention to promote health lifestyle habits in new university students. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN67684181.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2458-14-563

Cites

22 of 22 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Ajzen I Attitudes, Personality and Behaviour 1988 Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press
  2. National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence Guide to the methods of technology appraisal http://www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/howwework/devnicetech/guidetothemethodsoftechnologyappraisal.jsp 27905712

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Epton, T., Norman, P., Dadzie, A.-S., Harris, P. R., Webb, T. L., Sheeran, P., Julious, S. A., Ciravegna, F., Brennan, A., Meier, P. S., Naughton, D., Petroczi, A., Kruger, J., & Shah, I.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • University of Sussex (GB)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Kingston University London (GB)
Corresponding author
Epton, Tracy
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2014-06-05
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
563-563
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2141826154
Cited by
82
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4
FWCI
11.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Repository (Kingston University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Alzheimer's Society
  • Alzheimer's Research Trust
  • Cancer Research UK
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • British Heart Foundation
  • Diabetes UK
  • Stroke Association
  • Public Health Agency
  • Directorate for Biological Sciences
  • Medical Research Council (MR/K023195/1, MR/J000450/1)
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  • Economic and Social Research Council
  • World Cancer Research Fund
  • Health and Social Care Research and Development Division
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Lifestyle Studies
Keywords
university students, self-affirmation theory, theory of planned behavior, implementation intentions, smoking prevention, fruit and vegetable intake, physical activity, alcohol consumption, health behavior change, intervention engagement, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Smoking Prevention, Adolescent, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Models, Theoretical, Obesity, Students, Universities, Health Behavior, Treatment Outcome, Internet, Young Adult

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