Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/30475
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFrench, David Pen_UK
dc.contributor.authorCameron, Elaineen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBenton, Jack Sen_UK
dc.contributor.authorDeaton, Christien_UK
dc.contributor.authorHarvie, Michelleen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-19T01:05:43Z-
dc.date.available2019-11-19T01:05:43Z-
dc.date.issued2017-10en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/30475-
dc.description.abstractBackground The assessment and communication of disease risk that is personalised to the individual is widespread in healthcare contexts. Despite several systematic reviews of RCTs, it is unclear under what circumstances that personalised risk estimates promotes change in four key health-related behaviours: smoking, physical activity, diet and alcohol consumption. Purpose The present research aims to systematically identify, evaluate and synthesise the findings of existing systematic reviews. Methods This systematic review of systematic reviews followed published guidance. A search of four databases and two-stage screening procedure with good reliability identified nine eligible systematic reviews. Results The nine reviews each included between three and 15 primary studies, containing 36 unique studies. Methods of personalising risk feedback included imaging/visual feedback, genetic testing, and numerical estimation from risk algorithms. The reviews were generally high quality. For a broad range of methods of estimating and communicating risk, the reviews found no evidence that risk information had strong or consistent effects on health-related behaviours. The most promising effects came from interventions using visual or imaging techniques and with smoking cessation and dietary behaviour as outcomes, but with inconsistent results. Few interventions explicitly used theory, few targeted self-efficacy or response efficacy, and a limited range of Behaviour Change Techniques were used. Conclusions Presenting risk information on its own, even when highly personalised, does not produce strong effects on health-related behaviours or changes which are sustained. Future research in this area should build on the existing knowledge base about increasing the effects of risk communication on behaviour.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherOxford University Press (OUP)en_UK
dc.relationFrench DP, Cameron E, Benton JS, Deaton C & Harvie M (2017) Can Communicating Personalised Disease Risk Promote Healthy Behaviour Change? A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 51 (5), pp. 718-729. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-017-9895-zen_UK
dc.rightsThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons At tribution 4.0 International License (http:/ / creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_UK
dc.subjectSystematic reviewen_UK
dc.subjectRisk communicationen_UK
dc.subjectBehaviour changeen_UK
dc.subjectBehaviouren_UK
dc.titleCan Communicating Personalised Disease Risk Promote Healthy Behaviour Change? A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviewsen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s12160-017-9895-zen_UK
dc.identifier.pmid28290066en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleAnnals of Behavioral Medicineen_UK
dc.citation.issn1532-4796en_UK
dc.citation.issn0883-6612en_UK
dc.citation.volume51en_UK
dc.citation.issue5en_UK
dc.citation.spage718en_UK
dc.citation.epage729en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.contributor.funderPrevent Breast Canceren_UK
dc.contributor.funderNIHR CLAHRC Greater Manchesteren_UK
dc.citation.date13/03/2017en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Manchesteren_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationPsychologyen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Manchesteren_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Cambridgeen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationSouth Manchester University Hospitals NHS Trusten_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000410899500009en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85015040614en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1477172en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-8959-5148en_UK
dc.date.accepted2017-03-01en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2017-03-01en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2019-11-14en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_UK
local.rioxx.authorFrench, David P|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorCameron, Elaine|0000-0002-8959-5148en_UK
local.rioxx.authorBenton, Jack S|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorDeaton, Christi|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorHarvie, Michelle|en_UK
local.rioxx.projectProject ID unknown|Prevent Breast Cancer|en_UK
local.rioxx.projectResearch Capability funding|NIHR CLAHRC Greater Manchester|en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2019-11-14en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/|2019-11-14|en_UK
local.rioxx.filename12160_2017_article_9895.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source1532-4796en_UK
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
12160_2017_article_9895.pdfFulltext - Published Version536.97 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.