Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London, UK.
Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, University College London, UK.
Transl Behav Med. 2018 Mar 1;8(2):212-224. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibx019.
Behavior change interventions typically contain multiple potentially active components: behavior change techniques (BCTs). Identifying which specific BCTs or BCT combinations have the potential to be effective for a given behavior in a given context presents a major challenge. The aim of this study was to review the methods that have been used to identify effective BCTs for given behaviors in given contexts and evaluate their strengths and limitations. A scoping review was conducted of studies that had sought to identify effective BCTs. Articles referring to "behavio(u)r change technique(s)" in the abstract/text were located, and ones that involved identification of effective BCTs were selected. The methods reported were coded. The methods were analyzed in general terms using "PASS" criteria: Practicability (facility to apply the method appropriately), Applicability (facility to generalize from findings to contexts and populations of interest), Sensitivity (facility to identify effective BCTs), and Specificity (facility to rule out ineffective BCTs). A sample of 10% of the studies reviewed was then evaluated using these criteria to assess how far the strengths and limitations identified in principle were borne out in practice. One hundred and thirty-five studies were identified. The methods used in those studies were experimental manipulation of BCTs, observational studies comparing outcomes in the presence or absence of BCTs, meta-analyses of BCT comparisons, meta-regressions evaluating effect sizes with and without specific BCTs, reviews of BCTs found in effective interventions, and meta-classification and regression trees. The limitations of each method meant that only weak conclusions could be drawn regarding the effectiveness of specific BCTs or BCT combinations. Methods for identifying effective BCTs linked to target behavior and context all have important inherent limitations. A strategy needs to be developed that can systematically combine the strengths of the different methods and that can link these constructs in an ontology of behavior change interventions.
行为改变技术(BCTs)。确定哪些特定的 BCT 或 BCT 组合在特定的背景下对特定的行为具有潜在的有效性,这是一个主要的挑战。本研究旨在回顾已用于确定特定背景下特定行为的有效 BCT 的方法,并评估其优缺点。对试图确定有效 BCT 的研究进行了范围性回顾。在摘要/文本中提到“行为改变技术(s)”的文章被定位,并且涉及到确定有效 BCT 的文章被选择。报告的方法被编码。使用“PASS”标准对报告的方法进行了一般分析:可行性(适当应用方法的能力)、适用性(从发现到感兴趣的背景和人群推广的能力)、敏感性(识别有效 BCT 的能力)和特异性(排除无效 BCT 的能力)。然后,使用这些标准评估审查的研究样本的 10%,以评估在实践中识别出的优缺点在多大程度上得到了体现。确定了 135 项研究。这些研究中使用的方法是 BCT 的实验操作、比较有无 BCT 时结果的观察研究、BCT 比较的荟萃分析、评估有和没有特定 BCT 的效果大小的元回归、对有效干预中发现的 BCT 的综述,以及元分类和回归树。每种方法的局限性意味着只能对特定 BCT 或 BCT 组合的有效性得出薄弱的结论。与目标行为和背景相关的确定有效 BCT 的方法都存在重要的固有局限性。需要制定一种策略,可以系统地结合不同方法的优势,并在行为改变干预措施的本体论中联系这些结构。