Horwath C C
caroline.horwath@stonebow
Nutr Res Rev. 1999 Dec;12(2):281-317. doi: 10.1079/095442299108728965.
This review provides a rigorous investigation of the question of whether the transtheoretical model (TTM) (or stages of change model) is applicable to eating behaviour change. The TTM is currently the most popular of a number of stage theories being used to examine health behaviour change. Stage theories specify an ordered set of 'stages of readiness to change' into which people can be classified and identify the factors that can facilitate movement from one stage to the next. If eating behaviour change follows a stage process, then nutritionists could identify the predominant stage or stages in a population and focus resources on those issues most likely to move people to the next stage (e.g. from no intention of changing, to thinking about changing). In addressing this question, the review draws on the defining characteristics of stage theories as clarified by Weinstein et al. (1998), provides an in-depth coverage of methodological considerations, and a detailed summary table of dietary studies applying the TTM. Specific recommendations are made for improving the accuracy of dietary stage classifications. Among the key conclusions are: (1) dietary studies using the TTM have been hampered by a focus on nutritional outcomes such as dietary fat reduction, rather than clearly understood food behaviours (e.g. five servings of fruit and vegetables per day); (2) accurate stage classification systems are possible for food-based goals, but major misclassification problems occur with nutrient-based goals; (3) observation of an association between stage and dietary intake is not sufficient to demonstrate the validity of the model for dietary behaviour; (4) there is a need for valid questionnaires to measure all aspects of the TTM, and more research on the whole model, particularly the 'processes of change', rather than on single constructs such as 'stage' (5) cross-sectional studies generally support the predicted patterns of between-stage differences in decisional balance, self-efficacy, and processes of change; (6) studies which test the key hypothesis that different factors are important in distinguishing different stages are rare, as are prospective studies and stage-matched interventions. Only such studies can conclusively determine whether the TTM is applicable to eating behaviour. Since the ultimate test of the TTM will be the effectiveness of stage-matched dietary interventions, the review ends by exploring the requirements for such studies.
本综述对跨理论模型(TTM)(即改变阶段模型)是否适用于饮食行为改变这一问题进行了严谨的调查。TTM是目前用于研究健康行为改变的众多阶段理论中最受欢迎的一种。阶段理论明确了一套有序的“改变准备阶段”,人们可据此分类,并确定能促进从一个阶段过渡到下一个阶段的因素。如果饮食行为改变遵循阶段过程,那么营养学家就能确定人群中占主导的一个或多个阶段,并将资源集中于最有可能促使人们进入下一阶段的问题上(例如,从不打算改变到开始考虑改变)。在探讨这个问题时,本综述借鉴了温斯坦等人(1998年)阐明的阶段理论的定义特征,深入涵盖了方法学考量,并给出了应用TTM的饮食研究的详细汇总表。文中针对提高饮食阶段分类的准确性提出了具体建议。主要结论如下:(1)使用TTM的饮食研究因侧重于营养结果(如减少膳食脂肪)而非明确的食物行为(如每天吃五份水果和蔬菜)而受到阻碍;(2)基于食物目标的准确阶段分类系统是可行的,但基于营养素目标存在重大的分类错误问题;(3)观察到阶段与饮食摄入量之间的关联不足以证明该模型对饮食行为的有效性;(4)需要有效的问卷来测量TTM的各个方面,并且需要对整个模型进行更多研究,特别是“改变过程”,而不是单个结构(如“阶段”);(5)横断面研究总体上支持在决策平衡、自我效能和改变过程中阶段间差异的预测模式;(6)检验不同因素在区分不同阶段中很重要这一关键假设的研究很少,前瞻性研究和阶段匹配干预也很少。只有这类研究才能最终确定TTM是否适用于饮食行为。由于TTM的最终检验将是阶段匹配饮食干预的有效性,因此本综述最后探讨了此类研究的要求。