Riemsma, R. P., Pattenden, Jill, Bridle, Christopher, Sowden, Amanda J., Mather, Lisa, Watt, Ian, 1957- and Walker, Anne. (2002) A systematic review of the effectiveness of interventions based on a stages-of-change approach to promote individual behaviour change in health care settings. Health Technology Assessment, Vol.6 (No.24). pp. 1-242. ISSN 1366-5278

Preview	Text WRAP_Riemsma_Systematic_review_effectiveness.pdf - Published Version Download (1129Kb) | Preview
Preview	Text (Coversheet) WRAP_coversheet_Riemsma_Systematic_review_effectiveness.pdf - Supplemental Material Download (50Kb) | Preview

Abstract

Background Over recent years, interest in reducing early mortality and preventing morbidity through lifestyle changes has grown exponentially. Interventions (or methods) used within healthcare settings to modify risky behaviours have increasingly been based on stage theories or staged approaches to behaviour change. The attraction of stage-based models lies in their ability to explain why interventions aimed at large groups or the general public, such as mass media or community interventions, are rarely universally effective. Stage-based models propose that ‘tailored’ interventions, which take into account the current stage an individual has reached in the change process, will be more effective than ‘one size fits all’ interventions. Despite the widespread use of stage-based models, it has been suggested that there is little evidence available about the effectiveness of this approach in changing behaviour. Therefore, this systematic review draws together information about the effectiveness of interventions based on the stages-of-change approach from different settings and different population groups. Objective To systematically assess the effectiveness of interventions using a stage-based approach in bringing about positive changes in health-related behaviour. Methods Search strategy A wide range of electronic databases were searched from inception to May 2000. In addition, searches of the Internet were carried out using a range of search engines. The bibliographies of retrieved references were scanned for further relevant publications. The authors of abstracts appearing in conferences proceedings identified by the literature search were contacted for further information about their research. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions, that aimed to influence individual health behaviour, used within a stages-of-change approach were eligible for inclusion. Only studies that reported health-related behaviour change such as smoking cessation, reduced alcohol consumption or dietary intake and stage movemphasizent were included. The target population included individuals whose behaviour could be modified, primarily in order to prevent the onset, or progression, of disease. There was no limitation of study by country of origin, language or date. Procedure Assessment of titles and abstracts was performed independently by two reviewers. If either reviewer considered a reference to be relevant, the full paper was retrieved. Full papers were assessed against the review selection criteria by two independent reviewers, and disagreemphasizents were resolved through discussion. Data were extracted by one reviewer into structured summary tables and checked by a second reviewer. Health behaviour change was the primary outcome of interest. Secondary outcomes included: assessment of stage movemphasizent, health-related outcomes, intermediate outcomes, any adverse effects resulting from the intervention, as well as cost-effectiveness data. Information about the implemphasizentation of each intervention and how the relevant professionüls were trained was also recorded where given. Any disagreemphasizents about data extraction were resolved by discussion. Each included trial was assessed against a comprehensive checklist for methodological quality and quality of the implemphasizentation of the ƒntervention. Quality assessment was performed by one reviewer and checked by a second, with disagreemphasizents resolved by discussion. Results Thirty-seven RCTs were included in the review. Three studies evaluated interventions aimed at prevention (two for alcohol consumption and one for cigarette smoking). In 13 trials the interventions were aimed at smoking cessation, seven studies evaluated interventions aimed at the promotion of physical activity, and five studies evaluated interventions aimed at dietary change. Six trials evaluated interventions aimed at multiple lifestyle changes. Two studies evaluated interventions aimed at the promotion of screening mammography, and one study evaluated an intervention aimed at the promotion of treatment adherence. Four of these studies also included an economic evaluation. Results of the quality assessment Methodological quality of the trials was mixed, and ranged from 2 to 11 out of 13 quality items present. The main problems were lack of detail on the methods used to produce true randomisation (methods of randomisation and concealment of allocation); lack of blinding of participants (where appropriate), outcome assessors and care-providers; and failure to use intention-to-treat analysis. The main issue with the quality of the implemphasizentation was lack of information on the validity of the instrument used to assess an individual’s stage of change. Evidence of effectiveness In one of the 13 trials aimed at smoking cessation the results could not be compared to a non-stage-based intervention, because only stage-based interventions were included. In four of the remaining 12 smoking cessation trials, significant differences favouring the intervention group for scores on quit rates were found; in three of these the comparator was a usual-care control group and in one a non-stage-based intervention. One study showed mixed outcomes. In the remaining seven smoking cessation trials no significant differences between groups in behavioural change outcomes were found. One of the seven trials aimed at the promotion of physical activity did not report any data on behaviour change. Three trials found no significant differences between groups in behavioural change outcomes. Two trials showed mixed effects, and one trial mainly showed significant effects in favour of the stage-based intervention. Two of the five trials aimed at dietary change reported significant effects in favour of the stage-based intervention; in one trial this was in comparison to a non-stage-based intervention and in the other to a usual-care control group. Two trials showed mixed effects, and in one trial no significant differences between groups in behavioural change outcomes were found. Three of the six studies aimed at multiple lifestyle changes showed no differences between groups for any outcomes included. Two studies showed mixed effects, and one study showed positive effects for all outcomes included: smoking cessation, fat intake and physical activity. One of the two trials aimed at the promotion of screening mammography found no significant differences between groups for nearly all outcomes. The other trial showed a significant difference in favour of the stage-based intervention. The trial aimed at the promotion of treatment adherence showed significant results in favour of the stage-based intervention. Two out of three trials aimed at prevention showed no significant differences between groups for any measure of behaviour change. The other trial showed mixed outcomes. Studies with low-income participants tended not to report effects favouring the stage-based intervention. Other study characteristics, such as number of respondents, age and sex of respondents, year of publication, setting and verification of outcome measures, seemphasized to have little relationship with the effectiveness of the stage-based intervention. Conclusions Overall there appears to be little evidence to suggest that stage-based interventions are more effective compared to non-stage-based interventions. Similarly there is little evidence that stage-based interventions are more effective when compared to no intervention or usual-care. Out of 37 trials, 17 showed no significant differences between groups, eight trials showed mixed effects, and ten trials showed effects in favour of the stage-based intervention(s). One trial presented no data on behavioural outcomes, and another included stage-based interventions only. Twenty trials compared a stage-based intervention with a non-stage-based intervention, ten trials reported no significant differences between groups, five reported mixed effects and five reported significant effects in favour of the stage-based intervention. There does not seem to be any relationship between the methodological quality of the study, the targeted behaviour or quality of the implemphasizentation (both in terms of exposure and in terms of full use of the model) and effectiveness of the stage-based intervention. The methodological quality of studies was mixed, and few studies mentioned validation of the stages-of-change instrument. In addition, there was little consistency in the types of interventions employed once participants were classified into stages and little knowledge about the types of interventions needed once people were classified. It was unclear in a number of trials whether the intervention was properly stage-based. Given the limited evidence for the effectiveness of interventions tailored to the stages-of-change approach practitioners and policy makers need to recognise that this approach has a status which appears to be unwarranted when it is evaluated in a systematic way.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	R Medicine > RA Public aspects of medicine
Divisions:	Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Health behavior
Journal or Publication Title:	Health Technology Assessment
Publisher:	NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme
ISSN:	1366-5278
Date:	2002
Volume:	Vol.6
Number:	No.24
Page Range:	pp. 1-242
Identification Number:	10.3310/hta6240
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Publication Status:	Published
Access rights to Published version:	Open Access
Funder:	NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme (Great Britain)
References:	1. Arroll B, Beaglehole R. Does physical activity lower blood pressure: a critical review of the clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:439–47. 2. Berlin JA, Colditz GA. A meta-analysis of physical activity in the prevention of coronary heart disease. Am J Epidemiol 1990;132:612–28. 3. US Department of Health and Human Services. Cardiac rehabilitation clinical practice guideline. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research and National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute; 1995. 4. ASPIRE Steering Group. A British Cardiac Society survey of the potential for the secondary prevention of coronary disease: ASPIRE principal results. Heart 1996;75:334–42. 5. Campbell NC, Thain J, Deans HG, Ritchie LD, Rawles JM. Secondary prevention in coronary heart disease: baseline survey of provision in general practice. BMJ 1998;316:1430–4. 6. Davey Smith G, Bennett R. Behavioural counselling in general practice about risk of CHD – nonattendance for follow up distorts results and shows that people don’t like counselling. BMJ 2000;321:49. 7. Becker M. The health belief model and personal health behavior. New Jersey: Slack; 1974. 8. Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In: Kuhl J, Beckman J, editors. Action–control: from cognition to behavior. Heidelberg: Springer; 1985. p. 11–39. 9. Skinner BF. Science and human behaviour. New York: Macmillan; 1953. 10. Bandura A. A social learning theory. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1977. 11. Prochaska JO, Di Clemente CC, Norcross JC. In search of how people change: applications to addictive behaviours. Am Psychol 1992;47:1102–14. 12. Schwarzer R, Fuchs R. Self-efficacy and health behaviours. In: Conner M, Norman P, editors. Predicting health behaviour. Buckingham: Open University Press; 1996. 13. Weinstein ND, Sandman PM. A model of the precaution adoption process: evidence from home radon testing. Health Psychol 1992;11:170–80. 14. Sutton S. Transtheoretical model of behaviour change. In: Baum A, Newman S, Weinman J, West R, McManus C, editors. Cambridge handbook of psychology, health and medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1997. 15. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, DiClemente CC, Fava J. Measuring processes of change: applications to the cessation of smoking. J Consult Clin Psychol 1988;56:520–8. 16. Mason P, Hunt P, Raw M, Sills M. Helping people change: trainer’s manual. London: Health Education Authority; 1994. 17. West R, McEwen A. Smoking cessation training in England: a survey of trainers and health authorities. A report to the Health Development Agency. July 2001. URL: http://www.hda-online.org.uk/ downloads/pdfs/smoking_cess_training.pdf 18. Bunton R, Baldwin S, Flynn D. The stages-of-change model and its use in health promotion: a critical review. Edinburgh: Health Education Board for Scotland; 1999. 19. Bunton R, Baldwin S, Flynn D, Whitelaw S. The ‘stages of change’ model in health promotion: science and ideology. Crit Public Health 2000;10:55–70. 20. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness. CRD Report No. 4. 2nd ed. York: University of York; 2001. 21. Campbell MK, DeVellis BM, Strecher VJ, Ammerman AS, DeVellis RF, Sandler RS. Improving dietary behavior: the effectiveness of tailored messages in primary care settings. Am J Public Health 1994;84:783–7. 22. Handmaker NS, Miller WR, Manicke M. Findings of a pilot study of motivational interviewing with pregnant drinkers. J Stud Alcohol 1999;60:285–7. 23. Pill R, Stott NCH, Rollnick SR, Rees M. A randomized controlled trial of an intervention designed to improve the care given in general practice to type II diabetic patients: patient outcomes and professional ability to change behaviour. Fam Pract 1998;15:229–35. 24. Marcus BH, Emmons KM, Simkin-Silverman LR, Linnan LA, Taylor ER, Bock BC, et al. Evaluation of motivationally tailored vs. standard self-help physical activity interventions at the workplace. Am J Health Promot 1998;12:246–53. 25. Booth RE, Kwiatowski C, Iguchi MY, Pinto F, John D. Facilitating treatment entry among outof- treatment injection drug users. Public Health Rep 1998;113:116–28. 26. Treasure JL, Katzman M, Schmidt U, Troop N, Todd G, de Silva P. Engagement and outcome in the treatment of bulimia nervosa: first phase of a sequential design comparing motivation enhancement therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy. Behav Res Ther 1999;37:405–18. 27. Stewart JE, Wolfe GR, Maeder L, Hartz GW. Changes in dental knowledge and self-efficacy scores following interventions to change oral hygiene behavior. Patient Educ Couns 1996; 27:269–77. 28. Haddock J, Burrows C. The role of the nurse in health promotion: an evaluation of a smoking cessation programme in surgical pre-admission clinics. J Adv Nurs 1997;26:1098–110. 29. Richmond R, Mendelsohn C. Interventions for smokers in general practice. Translating theory and research into practice. In: Slama K, editor. 9th Tobacco and Health World Conference, Paris 1994. New York: Plenum Press; 1995. p. 477–480. 30. Mhurchu CN, Margetts BM, Speller V. Randomized clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of two dietary interventions for patients with hyperlipidaemia. Clin Sci 1998;95:479–87. 31. Kreuter M, Oswald DL, Bull FC, Clark EM. Are tailored health education materials always more effective than non-tailored materials? Health Educ Res 2000;15:305–15. 32. Weinstein ND, Lyon JE, Sandman PM. Pilot study of radon testing interventions: Department of Human Ecology, Rutgers University. Unpublished manuscript; 1996. 33. Werch CE, Carlson JM, Pappas DM, DiClemente CC. Brief nurse consultations for preventing alcohol use among urban school youth. J Sch Health 1996;66:335–8. 34. Butler CC, Rollnick S, Cohen D, Bachmann M, Russell I, Stott N. Motivational consulting versus brief advice for smokers in general practice: a randomized trial. Br J Gen Pract 1999;49:611–16. 35. Woollard J, Beilin L, Lord T, Puddey I, Macadam D, Rouse I. A controlled trial of nurse counselling on lifestyle change for hypertensives treated in general practice: preliminary results. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 1995;22:466–8. 36. Lutz SF. The impact of computer-tailored messages and goal setting on daily fruit and vegetable intake [PhD]. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; 1996. 37. Harland J, White M, Drinkwater C, Chinn D, Farr L, Howel D. The Newcastle exercise project: a randomised controlled trial of methods to promote physical activity in primary care. BMJ 1999;319:828–32. 38. Brug J, Glanz K, Van Assema P, Kok G, Van Breukelen G. The impact of computer-tailored feedback and iterative feedback on fat, fruit, and vegetable intake. Health Educ Behav 1998;25:517–31. 39. Kristal AR, Glanz K, Tilley BC, Li SH. Mediating factors in dietary change: understanding the impact of a worksite nutrition intervention. Health Educ Behav 2000;27:112–25. 40. Weinstein ND, Lyon JE, Sandman PM, Cuite CL. Experimental evidence for stages of health behavior change: the precaution adoption process model applied to home radon testing. Health Psychol 1998;17:445–53. 41. Swanson AJ, Pantalon MV, Cohen KR. Motivational interviewing and treatment adherence among psychiatric and dually diagnosed patients. J Nerv Ment Dis 1999;187:630–5. 42. Berman BA, Gritz ER, Braxton-Owens H, Nisenbaum R. Targeting adult smokers through a multi-ethnic public school system. J Cancer Educ 1995;10:91–101. 43. Dijkstra A, De Vries H, Roijackers J. Targeting smokers with low readiness to change with tailored and nontailored self-help materials. Prev Med 1999;28:203–11. 44. Gritz ER, Carr CR, Rapkin D, Abemayor E, Chang LJ, Wong WK, et al. Predictors of long-term smoking cessation in head and neck cancer patients. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1993;2:261–70. 45. Lennox AS, Bain N, Taylor RJ, McKie L, Donnan PT. Stages-of-change training for opportunistic smoking intervention by the primary healthcare team. Part I: randomised controlled trial of the effect of training on patient smoking outcomes and health professional behaviour as recalled by patients. Health Educ J 1998;57:140–9. 46. Morgan GD, Noll EL, Orleans CT, Rimer BK, Amfoh K, Bonney G. Reaching midlife and older smokers: tailored interventions for routine medical care. Prev Med 1996;25:346–54. 47. Pallonen UE, Leskinen L, Prochaska JO, Willey CJ, Kaariainen R, Salonen JT. A 2-year self-help smoking cessation manual intervention among middle-aged Finnish men: an application of the transtheoretical model. Prev Med 1994;23:507–14. 48. Pallonen UE, Velicer WF, Prochaska JO, Rossi JS, Bellis JM, Tsoh JY, et al. Computer-based smoking cessation interventions in adolescents: description, feasibility, and six-month follow-up findings. Subst Use Misuse 1998;33:935–65. 49. DiClemente CC, Prochaska JO, Fairhurst SK, Velicer WF, Velasquez MM, Rossi JS. The process of smoking cessation: an analysis of precontemplation, contemplation, and preparation stages-of-change. J Consult Clin Psychol 1991;59:295–304. 50. Resnicow K, Royce J, Vaughan R, Orlandi MA, Smith M. Analysis of a multicomponent smoking cessation project: what worked and why. Prev Med 1997;26:373–81. 51. Sinclair HK, Silcock J, Bond CM, Lennox AS, Winfield AJ. The cost-effectiveness of intensive pharmaceutical intervention in assisting people to stop smoking. Int J Pharm Pract 1999;7:107–12. 52. Velicer WF, Prochaska JO, Fava JL, Laforge RG, Rossi JS. Interactive versus noninteractive interventions and dose-response relationships for stage-matched smoking cessation programs in a managed care setting. Health Psychol 1999;18:21–8. 53. Wang WD. Feasibility and effectiveness of a stagesof- change model in cigarette smoking cessation counseling. J Formos Med Assoc 1994;93:752–7. 54. Peterson TR, Aldana SG. Improving exercise behavior: an application of the stages-of-change model in a worksite setting. Am J Health Promot 1999;13:229–32. 55. Goldstein MG, Pinto BM, Marcus BH, Lynn H, Jette AM, Rakowski W, et al. Physician-based physical activity counseling for middle-aged and older adults: a randomized trial. Ann Behav Med 1999;21:40–7. 56. Braatz JS, Ames B, Holmes-Rovner M, King S, McPhail J, Vogel P. The effect of a physical activity intervention based on the transtheoretical model of changing physical-activity-related behavior on low-income elderly volunteers. J Aging Phys Activity 1999;7:308–9. 57. Graham-Clarke P, Oldenburg B. The effectiveness of a general-practice-based physical activity intervention on patient physical activity status. Behav Change 1994;11:132–44. 58. Cardinal BJ, Sachs ML. Effects of mail-mediated, stage-matched exercise behavior change strategies on female adults’ leisure-time exercise behavior. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1996;36:100–7. 59. Cash TL. Effects of different exercise promotion strategies and stage of exercise on reported physical activity, self-motivation, and stages of exercise in worksite employees [EdD]. Philadelphia Temple University; 1997. 60. Havas S, Anliker J, Damron D, Langenberg P, Ballesteros M, Feldman R. Final results of the Maryland WIC 5-a-day Promotion Program. Am J Public Health 1998;88:1161–7. 61. Baker A, Wardle J. Low intensity: high impact! Can low intensity interventions change behaviour? In: 13th Conference of the European Health Psychology Society ‘Psychology and the Renaissance of Health’, Florence 1999. 62. Glasgow RE, Terborg JR, Hollis JF, Severson HH, Boles SM. Take Heart: results from the initial phase of work-site Wellness Program. Am J Public Health 1995;85:209–16. 63. Steptoe A, Doherty S, Rink E, Kerry S. Behavioural counselling in general practice for the promotion of healthy behaviour among adults at increased risk of coronary heart disease: randomised trial. BMJ 1999;319:943–7. 64. Gritz ER, Thompson B, Emmons K, Ockene JK, McLerran DF, Nielsen IR. Gender differences among smokers and quitters in the Working Well trial. Prev Med 1998;27:553–61. 65. Oliansky DM, Wildenhaus KJ, Manlove K, Arnold T, Schoener EP. Effectiveness of brief interventions in reducing substance abuse among at risk primary care patients in three community-based clinics. Subst Abuse 1997;18:95–103. 66. Scales R. Motivational interviewing and skillsbased counseling in cardiac rehabilitation: the cardiovascular health initiative and lifestyle education (Chile) study [PhD]. Albuquerque: The University of New Mexico; 1998. 67. Crane LA, Leakey TA, Rimer BK, Wolfe P, Woodworth MA, Warnecke RB. Effectiveness of a telephone outcall intervention to promote screening mammography among low-income women. Prev Med 1998;27:S39-49. 68. Rakowski W, Ehrich B, Goldstein MG, Rimer BK, Pearlman DN, Clark MA, et al. Increasing mammography among women aged 40–74 by use of a stagematched, tailored intervention. Prev Med 1998;27:748–56. 69. Aveyard P, Cheng KK, Almond J, Sherratt E, Lancashire R, Lawrence T, et al. Cluster randomised controlled trial of expert system based on the transtheoretical (“stages of change”) model for smoking prevention and cessation in schools. BMJ 1999;319:948–53. 70. Werch C, Pappas D, Carlson J, DiClemente C. Six-month outcomes of an alcohol prevention program for inner-city youth. Am J Health Promot 1999;13:237–9. 71. Biener L, Abrams D. The contemplation ladder: validation of measure of readiness to consider smoking cessation. Health Psychol 1991;10:360–5. 72. DiClemente CC, Prochaska JO. Processes and stages-of-change: coping and competence in smoking behavior change. In: Shiffman S, Wills TA, editors. Coping and substance abuse. New York: Academic Press; 1985. p. 319–43. 73. DiClemente CC, Prochaska JO, Gibertini M. Selfefficacy and the stages of self-change of smoking. Cognitive Ther Res 1985;9:181–200. 74. DiClemente CC. Self-efficacy and the addictive behaviors. J Soc Clin Psychol 1986;4:302–15. 75. Velicer WF, DiClemente CC, Prochaska JO, Brandenburg N. Decisional balance measure for assessing and predicting smoking status. J Pers Soc Psychol 1985;48:1279–89. 76. McConnaughy EA, Prochaska JO, Velicer WF. Stages-of-change in psychotherapy: measurement and sample profiles. Psychother Theory, Res Pract 1983;20:368–75. 77. Marcus BH, Selby VC, Niaura RS, Rossi JS. Selfefficacy and the stages of exercise behavior change. Res Q Exerc Sport 1992;63:60–6. 78. Marcus BH, Simkin LR. The stages of exercise behavior. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1993;33:83–8. 79. Marcus BH, Banspach SW, Lefebvre RC, Rossi JS, Carleton RA, Abrams DB. Using the stages-ofchange model to increase the adoption of physical activity among community participants. Am J Health Promot 1992;6:424–9. 80. Marcus BH, Rossi JS, Selby VC, Niaura RS, Abrams DB. The stages and processes of exercise adoption and maintenance in a worksite sample. Health Psychol 1992;11:386–95. 81. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC, Norcross JC. In search of how people change. Applications to addictive behaviors. Am Psychol 1992;47:1102–14. 82. Curry SJ, Kristal AR, Bowen DJ. An application of the stage model of behavior change to dietary fat reduction. Health Educ Res 1992;7:97–105. 83. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, Rossi JS, Goldstein MG, Marcus BH, Rakowski W, et al. Stages-of-change and decisional balance for 12 problem behaviors. Health Psychol 1994;13:39–46. 84. Greene GW, Rossi SR, Reed GR, Willey C, Prochaska JO. Stages-of-change for reducing dietary fat to 30% of energy or less. J Am Diet Assoc 1994;94:1105–12. 85. Cardinal BJ. The stages of exercise scale and stages of exercise behavior in female adults. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1995;35:87–92. 86. Cardinal BJ. Behavioral and biometric comparisons of the preparation, action, and maintenance stages of exercise. Wellness Perspect 1995;11:36–44. 87. Cardinal BJ. Construct validity of stages-of-change for exercise behavior. Am J Health Promot 1997;12:68–74. 88. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. The transtheoretical approach. In: Norcross JC, Goldfried MR, editors. Handbook of psychotherapy integration. New York: Basicbooks; 1992. p. 300–34. 89. McConnaughy EA, DiClemente CC, Prochaska JO, Velicer WF. Stages-of-change in psychotherapy: a follow-up report. Psychotherapy 1989;26:494–503. 90. Crane LA, Leakey TA, Ehrsam G, Rimer BK, Warnecke RB. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multiple outcalls to promote mammography among low-income women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2000;9:923–31. 91. Aveyard P, Sherratt E, Almond J, Cheng KK. Can the stages of change for adolescent smoking acquisition be measured reliably? Prev Med In press 2002. 92. Aveyard P, Sherratt E, Almond J, Lawrence T, Lancashire R, Griffin C, et al. The change-in-stage and updated smoking status results from a clusterrandomised trial of smoking prevention and cessation using the transtheoretical model in British adolescents. Prev Med 2001;33:313–24. 93. Cardinal B. The effectiveness of the stages-ofchange model and experimental exercise prescriptions in increasing female adults’ prospective physical activity and exercise behavior [doctoral dissertation]. Philadelphia: Temple University; 1993. 94. Rossi JS, Rossi SR, Velicer WF, Prochaska JO. Motivational readiness to control weight. In: Allison DB, editor. Handbook of assessment methods for eating behaviors and weight related problems: measures, theory and research. Newbury Park: Sage; 1995. p. 387–430. 95. Ashworth P. Breakthrough or bandwagon? Are interventions tailored to stage of change more effective than non-staged interventions? Health Educ J 1997;56:166–74. 96. Sutton S. A critical review of the transtheoretical model applied to smoking cessation. In: Norman P, Abraham C, Conner M, editors. Understanding and changing health behaviour: from health beliefs to self-regulation. Amsterdam: Harwood; 2000. 97. Lechner L, Brug J, De Vries H, van Assema P, Mudde A. Stages-of-change for fruit, vegetable and fat intake: consequences of misconception. Health Educ Res 1998;13:1–11. 98. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change. J Consult Clin Psychol 1983;51:390–5. 99. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF, Guadagnoli E, Rossi JS, DiClemente CC. Patterns of change: dynamic typology applied to smoking cessation. Multivariate Behav Res 1991;26:83–107. 100. Prochaska JO, Goldstein MG. Process of smoking cessation. Implications for clinicians. Clin Chest Med 1991;12:727–35. 101. Farkas AJ, Pierce JP, Zhu SH, Rosbrook B, Gilpin EA, Berry C, et al. Addiction versus stages-ofchange models in predicting smoking cessation. Addiction 1996;91:1271–80. 102. Sutton S. Can ‘stages-of-change’ provide guidance in the treatment of addictions? A critical examination of Prochaska and DiClemente’s model. In: Edwards G, Dare C, editors. Psychotherapy, psychological treatments and the addictions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996. p. 189–205. 103. Oldenburg B, Glanz K, Ffrench M. The application of staging models to the understanding of health behaviour change and the promotion of health. Psychol Health 1999;14:503–16. 104. Department of Health. Saving lives: our healthier nation. London: The Stationery Office; 1999. 105. Abraham C, Sheeran P, Johnston M. From health beliefs to self-regulation: theoretical advances in the psychology of action control. Psychol Health 1998;13:569–91. 106. Janz NK, Becker MH. The health belief model: a decade later. Health Educ Q 1984;11:1–47. 107. Tones K. Making a change for the better: the health action model. Healthlines 1995;27:17–19. 108. Rogers RW. Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: a revised theory of protection motivation. In: Cacioppo JR, Petty RE, editors. Social psychology: a source book. New York: Guilford Press; 1983. p. 153–76. 109. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 1986. 110. Conner M, Norman P. Health behaviour. In: Johnston DW, Johnston M, editors. Comprehensive clinical psychology. Vol. 8: Health psychology. Oxford: Elsevier; 1998. 111. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: an introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975. 112. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behaviour. Organiz Behav Hum Decision Process 1991;50:179–211. 113. Blackman D. Operant conditioning: an experimental analysis of behaviour. London: Methuen; 1974. 114. Bandura A, Walters RH. Social learning and personality development. London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1963. 115. Gollwitzer PM. The volitional benefits of planning. In: Gollwitzer PM, Bargh JA, editors. The psychology of action: linking cognition and motivation to behavior. New York: Guilford Press; 1996. p. 287–312.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/46347

Request changes to a record

Actions (login required)

View Item