Effectiveness of communications in enhancing adherence to public health behavioural interventions: a COVID-19 evidence review

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Health communication has relevance for virtually every aspect of health and well-being, including disease prevention. This review explored the effectiveness of communications in enhancing the adoption of or adherence to behavioural interventions (non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs)) related to COVID-19. The review takes the UK as a case study and focuses on self-reported behaviours (e.g. social distancing). It also reviews the psychosocial determinants of adherence. Searches were conducted using PubMed, Scopus, CINAL, ASSIA and iCite databases. Eleven thousand five hundred records were identified and 13 were included in the final sample. Included studies suggest that NPI adoption or adherence was generally high, and communication had significant impacts, with key themes including clarity and consistency, trust and control. Based on the evidence in this review, features of effective communication in the context of NPI adoption or adherence are (i) information should be conveyed clearly and conflicting (mixed) messages should be avoided; (ii) information should be conveyed by trusted sources (e.g. health authorities) and (iii) communication should strike a balance between being authoritative but avoiding language seen as controlling (e.g. ‘you must’). Future research should prioritize quantitative, experimental and longitudinal study designs, that focus specifically on communication as an intervention, and which measure behaviour.

This article is part of the theme issue 'The effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions on the COVID-19 pandemic: the evidence'.

Related collections

Most cited references 48

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions

Jonathan AC Sterne, Miguel A. Hernán, Barnaby Reeves … (2018)

Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that did not use randomisation to allocate units (individuals or clusters of individuals) to comparison groups. The tool will be particularly useful to those undertaking systematic reviews that include non-randomised studies.

0 comments Cited 3683 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

Jay Bavel, Katherine Baicker, Paulo S Boggio … (2020)

The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.

0 comments Cited 1815 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Theoretical explanations for maintenance of behaviour change: a systematic review of behaviour theories

Dominika Kwasnicka, Stephan Dombrowski, Martin White … (2016)

ABSTRACT Background: Behaviour change interventions are effective in supporting individuals in achieving temporary behaviour change. Behaviour change maintenance, however, is rarely attained. The aim of this review was to identify and synthesise current theoretical explanations for behaviour change maintenance to inform future research and practice. Methods: Potentially relevant theories were identified through systematic searches of electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO). In addition, an existing database of 80 theories was searched, and 25 theory experts were consulted. Theories were included if they formulated hypotheses about behaviour change maintenance. Included theories were synthesised thematically to ascertain overarching explanations for behaviour change maintenance. Initial theoretical themes were cross-validated. Findings: One hundred and seventeen behaviour theories were identified, of which 100 met the inclusion criteria. Five overarching, interconnected themes representing theoretical explanations for behaviour change maintenance emerged. Theoretical explanations of behaviour change maintenance focus on the differential nature and role of motives, self-regulation, resources (psychological and physical), habits, and environmental and social influences from initiation to maintenance. Discussion: There are distinct patterns of theoretical explanations for behaviour change and for behaviour change maintenance. The findings from this review can guide the development and evaluation of interventions promoting maintenance of health behaviours and help in the development of an integrated theory of behaviour change maintenance.

0 comments Cited 379 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Simon N. Williams:

ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2854-9946

Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing

Kimberly Dienes: Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing

Jemma Jaheed: Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing

Jamie K. Wardman: Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ValidationRole: Writing – review & editing

Judith Petts: Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci

Journal ID (publisher-id): RSTA

Journal ID (hwp): roypta

Title: Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences

Publisher: The Royal Society

ISSN (Print): 1364-503X

ISSN (Electronic): 1471-2962

Publication date (Print, pub): October 9, 2023

Publication date (Electronic, pub): August 24, 2023

Publication date PMC-release: August 24, 2023

Volume: 381

Issue: 2257 , Theme issue ‘The effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions on the COVID-19 pandemic: the evidence’ compiled and edited by Professor Sir Mark Walport

Electronic Location Identifier: 20230129

Affiliations

[ ¹ ] School of Psychology, Swansea University, , Vivien Tower, Singleton Park Campus, Swansea, Wales SA2 8PP, UK

[ ² ] Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, , Chicago, IL 60208, USA

[ ³ ] Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, , Manchester M13 9PL, UK

[ ⁴ ] School of Business, Leicester University, , Leicester LE2 1RQ, UK

[ ⁵ ] University of Plymouth, , Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK

Author notes

One contribution of 7 to a theme issue ‘ The effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions on the COVID-19 pandemic: the evidence ’.

Electronic supplementary material is available online at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6677623.

Author information

Simon N. Williams http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2854-9946

Article

Publisher ID: rsta20230129

DOI: 10.1098/rsta.2023.0129

PMC ID: 10446905

PubMed ID: 37611630

SO-VID: 5bed145b-44c9-4268-bc1f-6f142a2cc290

License:

Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.

History

Date received : April 28, 2023

Date accepted : May 23, 2023

Funding

Funded by: Royal Society, http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000288;

Custom metadata

cover-date October 9, 2023

Keywords: covid-19,health communication,non-pharmaceutical interventions,behavioural interventions,adherence

Data availability:

Keywords: covid-19, health communication, non-pharmaceutical interventions, behavioural interventions, adherence

Effectiveness of communications in enhancing adherence to public health behavioural interventions: a COVID-19 evidence review

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 48

ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions

Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

Theoretical explanations for maintenance of behaviour change: a systematic review of behaviour theories

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Author information

Article

History

Funding

Categories

Custom metadata

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 169

Cited by 2

Most referenced authors 3,287