Do automated digital health behaviour change interventions have a positive effect on self-efficacy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Katie  Newby; Grace Teah; Richard  Cooke; Xinru Li; Katherine Brown; Bradley Salisbury-Finch; Kayleigh Kwah; Naomi Bartle; Kristina Curtis; Emily Fulton; Joanne Parsons; Elise Dusseldorp; Stefanie Williams

doi:10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873

Do automated digital health behaviour change interventions have a positive effect on self-efficacy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Katie Newby, Grace Teah, Richard Cooke, Xinru Li, Katherine Brown, Bradley Salisbury-Finch, Kayleigh Kwah, Naomi Bartle, Kristina Curtis, Emily Fulton, Joanne Parsons, Elise Dusseldorp, Stefanie Williams

School of Health and Care

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

29 Citations (Scopus)

246 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Self-efficacy is an important determinant of health behaviour. Digital interventions are a potentially acceptable and cost-effective way of delivering programmes of health behaviour change at scale. Whether behaviour change interventions work to increase self-efficacy in this context is unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to identify whether automated digital interventions are associated with positive changes in self-efficacy amongst non-clinical populations for five major health behaviours, and which BCTs are associated with that change. A systematic literature search identified 20 studies (n = 5624) that assessed changes in self-efficacy and were included in a random-effects meta-analysis. Interventions targeted: healthy eating (k = 4), physical activity (k = 9), sexual behaviour (k = 3) and smoking (k = 4). No interventions targeting alcohol use were identified. Overall, interventions had a small, positive effect on self-efficacy (Formula presented.). The effect of interventions on self-efficacy did not differ as a function of health behaviour type (Q-between = 7.3704, p =.061, df = 3). Inclusion of the BCT ‘information about social and environmental consequences’ had a small, negative effect on self-efficacy (Formula presented.). Whilst this review indicates that digital interventions can be used to change self-efficacy, which techniques work best in this context is not clear.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	140-158
Number of pages	19
Journal	Health Psychology Review
Volume	15
Issue number	1
Early online date	20 Jan 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873
Publication status	Published - 2021

Bibliographical note

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Health Psychology Review on 20/01/2020, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873

Copyright © and Moral Rights are retained by the author(s) and/ or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.

Funder

Coventry University Early Career Researcher Pump Priming Award.

Keywords

Self-efficacy
behaviour change techniques
digital
health behaviour

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Clinical Psychology
Psychiatry and Mental health

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873

Post-PrintAccepted author manuscript, 469 KBLicence: CC BY-NC

Cite this

Newby, K., Teah, G., Cooke, R., Li, X., Brown, K., Salisbury-Finch, B., Kwah, K., Bartle, N., Curtis, K., Fulton, E., Parsons, J., Dusseldorp, E., & Williams, S. (2021). Do automated digital health behaviour change interventions have a positive effect on self-efficacy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Health Psychology Review, 15(1), 140-158. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873

Newby, K, Teah, G, Cooke, R, Li, X, Brown, K, Salisbury-Finch, B, Kwah, K, Bartle, N, Curtis, K, Fulton, E, Parsons, J, Dusseldorp, E & Williams, S 2021, 'Do automated digital health behaviour change interventions have a positive effect on self-efficacy? A systematic review and meta-analysis', Health Psychology Review, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 140-158. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873

@article{5be49f435b744160bd17bcb35c14e9f0,

title = "Do automated digital health behaviour change interventions have a positive effect on self-efficacy? A systematic review and meta-analysis",

abstract = "Self-efficacy is an important determinant of health behaviour. Digital interventions are a potentially acceptable and cost-effective way of delivering programmes of health behaviour change at scale. Whether behaviour change interventions work to increase self-efficacy in this context is unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to identify whether automated digital interventions are associated with positive changes in self-efficacy amongst non-clinical populations for five major health behaviours, and which BCTs are associated with that change. A systematic literature search identified 20 studies (n = 5624) that assessed changes in self-efficacy and were included in a random-effects meta-analysis. Interventions targeted: healthy eating (k = 4), physical activity (k = 9), sexual behaviour (k = 3) and smoking (k = 4). No interventions targeting alcohol use were identified. Overall, interventions had a small, positive effect on self-efficacy (Formula presented.). The effect of interventions on self-efficacy did not differ as a function of health behaviour type (Q-between = 7.3704, p =.061, df = 3). Inclusion of the BCT {\textquoteleft}information about social and environmental consequences{\textquoteright} had a small, negative effect on self-efficacy (Formula presented.). Whilst this review indicates that digital interventions can be used to change self-efficacy, which techniques work best in this context is not clear.",

keywords = "Self-efficacy, behaviour change techniques, digital, health behaviour",

author = "Katie Newby and Grace Teah and Richard Cooke and Xinru Li and Katherine Brown and Bradley Salisbury-Finch and Kayleigh Kwah and Naomi Bartle and Kristina Curtis and Emily Fulton and Joanne Parsons and Elise Dusseldorp and Stefanie Williams",

note = "This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Health Psychology Review on 20/01/2020, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873 Copyright {\textcopyright} and Moral Rights are retained by the author(s) and/ or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.",

year = "2021",

doi = "10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873",

language = "English",

volume = "15",

pages = "140--158",

journal = "Health Psychology Review",

issn = "1743-7199",

publisher = "Routledge",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Do automated digital health behaviour change interventions have a positive effect on self-efficacy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

AU - Newby, Katie

AU - Teah, Grace

AU - Cooke, Richard

AU - Li, Xinru

AU - Brown, Katherine

AU - Salisbury-Finch, Bradley

AU - Kwah, Kayleigh

AU - Bartle, Naomi

AU - Curtis, Kristina

AU - Fulton, Emily

AU - Parsons, Joanne

AU - Dusseldorp, Elise

AU - Williams, Stefanie

N1 - This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Health Psychology Review on 20/01/2020, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873 Copyright © and Moral Rights are retained by the author(s) and/ or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Self-efficacy is an important determinant of health behaviour. Digital interventions are a potentially acceptable and cost-effective way of delivering programmes of health behaviour change at scale. Whether behaviour change interventions work to increase self-efficacy in this context is unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to identify whether automated digital interventions are associated with positive changes in self-efficacy amongst non-clinical populations for five major health behaviours, and which BCTs are associated with that change. A systematic literature search identified 20 studies (n = 5624) that assessed changes in self-efficacy and were included in a random-effects meta-analysis. Interventions targeted: healthy eating (k = 4), physical activity (k = 9), sexual behaviour (k = 3) and smoking (k = 4). No interventions targeting alcohol use were identified. Overall, interventions had a small, positive effect on self-efficacy (Formula presented.). The effect of interventions on self-efficacy did not differ as a function of health behaviour type (Q-between = 7.3704, p =.061, df = 3). Inclusion of the BCT ‘information about social and environmental consequences’ had a small, negative effect on self-efficacy (Formula presented.). Whilst this review indicates that digital interventions can be used to change self-efficacy, which techniques work best in this context is not clear.

AB - Self-efficacy is an important determinant of health behaviour. Digital interventions are a potentially acceptable and cost-effective way of delivering programmes of health behaviour change at scale. Whether behaviour change interventions work to increase self-efficacy in this context is unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to identify whether automated digital interventions are associated with positive changes in self-efficacy amongst non-clinical populations for five major health behaviours, and which BCTs are associated with that change. A systematic literature search identified 20 studies (n = 5624) that assessed changes in self-efficacy and were included in a random-effects meta-analysis. Interventions targeted: healthy eating (k = 4), physical activity (k = 9), sexual behaviour (k = 3) and smoking (k = 4). No interventions targeting alcohol use were identified. Overall, interventions had a small, positive effect on self-efficacy (Formula presented.). The effect of interventions on self-efficacy did not differ as a function of health behaviour type (Q-between = 7.3704, p =.061, df = 3). Inclusion of the BCT ‘information about social and environmental consequences’ had a small, negative effect on self-efficacy (Formula presented.). Whilst this review indicates that digital interventions can be used to change self-efficacy, which techniques work best in this context is not clear.

KW - Self-efficacy

KW - behaviour change techniques

KW - digital

KW - health behaviour

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85078440044&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873

DO - 10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873

M3 - Article

SN - 1743-7199

VL - 15

SP - 140

EP - 158

JO - Health Psychology Review

JF - Health Psychology Review

IS - 1

ER -

Do automated digital health behaviour change interventions have a positive effect on self-efficacy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Funder

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this