Bluethmann Shirley M, Bartholomew L Kay, Murphy Caitlin C, Vernon Sally W
1 The University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, TX, USA.
2 The University of North Carolina Gillings School of Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Health Educ Behav. 2017 Apr;44(2):245-253. doi: 10.1177/1090198116647712. Epub 2016 Jul 10.
Theory use may enhance effectiveness of behavioral interventions, yet critics question whether theory-based interventions have been sufficiently scrutinized. This study applied a framework to evaluate theory use in physical activity interventions for breast cancer survivors. The aims were to (1) evaluate theory application intensity and (2) assess the association between extensiveness of theory use and intervention effectiveness.
Studies were previously identified through a systematic search, including only randomized controlled trials published from 2005 to 2013, that addressed physical activity behavior change and studied survivors who were <5 years posttreatment. Eight theory items from Michie and Prestwich's coding framework were selected to calculate theory intensity scores. Studies were classified into three subgroups based on extensiveness of theory use (Level 1 = sparse; Level 2 = moderate; and Level 3 = extensive).
Fourteen randomized controlled trials met search criteria. Most trials used the transtheoretical model ( n = 5) or social cognitive theory ( n = 3). For extensiveness of theory use, 5 studies were classified as Level 1, 4 as Level 2, and 5 as Level 3. Studies in the extensive group (Level 3) had the largest overall effect size ( g = 0.76). Effects were more modest in Level 1 and 2 groups with overall effect sizes of g = 0.28 and g = 0.36, respectively.
Theory use is often viewed as essential to behavior change, but theory application varies widely. In this study, there was some evidence to suggest that extensiveness of theory use enhanced intervention effectiveness. However, there is more to learn about how theory can improve interventions for breast cancer survivors.
理论的应用可能会提高行为干预的效果,但批评者质疑基于理论的干预措施是否得到了充分的审视。本研究应用了一个框架来评估乳腺癌幸存者身体活动干预中理论的应用情况。其目的是:(1)评估理论应用强度;(2)评估理论应用的广泛程度与干预效果之间的关联。
通过系统检索先前确定的研究,仅纳入2005年至2013年发表的随机对照试验,这些试验涉及身体活动行为改变,并研究了治疗后<5年的幸存者。从米基和普雷斯特维奇的编码框架中选取了8个理论项目来计算理论强度得分。根据理论应用的广泛程度,将研究分为三个亚组(1级=稀疏;2级=中等;3级=广泛)。
14项随机对照试验符合检索标准。大多数试验使用了跨理论模型(n = 5)或社会认知理论(n = 3)。在理论应用的广泛程度方面,5项研究被归类为1级,4项为2级,5项为3级。广泛组(3级)的总体效应量最大(g = 0.76)。1级和2级组的效应较小,总体效应量分别为g = 0.28和g = 0.36。
理论的应用通常被视为行为改变的关键,但理论应用差异很大。在本研究中,有证据表明理论应用的广泛程度提高了干预效果。然而,关于理论如何改善乳腺癌幸存者的干预措施,还有更多需要了解的地方。