Behavior change intervention research in healthcare settings: A review of recent reports with emphasis on external validity

Russell E. Glasgow, Sheana S. Bull, Cynthia Gillette, Lisa M. Klesges, David A. Dzewaltowski

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

136 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Information to judge both the internal and external validity of health behavior research conducted in healthcare settings is vital to translate research findings to practice. This paper reviews the extent to which this research has reported on elements of internal and external validity, with emphasis on the extent to which research has been conducted in representative settings with representative populations. Methods: A comprehensive review was conducted of controlled interventions for dietary change, physical activity, or smoking cessation conducted in healthcare settings and published in 12 leading health behavior journals between 1996 and 2000. Using the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework, the characteristics and results of these studies were summarized to document the extent to which intervention reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance were reported and what has been learned about each of these dimensions. Results: A total of 36 studies qualified for review. Participation rates among eligible patients were reported in 69% of studies and were generally quite high; in contrast, only 30% of studies reported on participation rates among either healthcare settings or providers. Implementation data were reported in 77% of the studies and these rates were generally high, with the caveat that intervention was often delivered by paid research staff. Long-term maintenance results were reported very consistently at the individual level, but program continuation was almost never reported at the setting level. Conclusions: We conclude that a much stronger emphasis needs to be placed on the representativeness of providers and settings that are studied. Examples of how this can be done and recommendations for future research are provided.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)62-69
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Preventive Medicine
Volume23
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2002

Fingerprint

Health Services Research
Research
Health Behavior
Delivery of Health Care
Maintenance
Smoking Cessation
Exercise
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Behavior change intervention research in healthcare settings : A review of recent reports with emphasis on external validity. / Glasgow, Russell E.; Bull, Sheana S.; Gillette, Cynthia; Klesges, Lisa M.; Dzewaltowski, David A.

In: American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 23, No. 1, 01.01.2002, p. 62-69.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{3eb94224e04a4c58a69b3a79d1e4e1c1,
title = "Behavior change intervention research in healthcare settings: A review of recent reports with emphasis on external validity",
abstract = "Background: Information to judge both the internal and external validity of health behavior research conducted in healthcare settings is vital to translate research findings to practice. This paper reviews the extent to which this research has reported on elements of internal and external validity, with emphasis on the extent to which research has been conducted in representative settings with representative populations. Methods: A comprehensive review was conducted of controlled interventions for dietary change, physical activity, or smoking cessation conducted in healthcare settings and published in 12 leading health behavior journals between 1996 and 2000. Using the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework, the characteristics and results of these studies were summarized to document the extent to which intervention reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance were reported and what has been learned about each of these dimensions. Results: A total of 36 studies qualified for review. Participation rates among eligible patients were reported in 69{\%} of studies and were generally quite high; in contrast, only 30{\%} of studies reported on participation rates among either healthcare settings or providers. Implementation data were reported in 77{\%} of the studies and these rates were generally high, with the caveat that intervention was often delivered by paid research staff. Long-term maintenance results were reported very consistently at the individual level, but program continuation was almost never reported at the setting level. Conclusions: We conclude that a much stronger emphasis needs to be placed on the representativeness of providers and settings that are studied. Examples of how this can be done and recommendations for future research are provided.",
author = "Glasgow, {Russell E.} and Bull, {Sheana S.} and Cynthia Gillette and Klesges, {Lisa M.} and Dzewaltowski, {David A.}",
year = "2002",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00437-3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "62--69",
journal = "American Journal of Preventive Medicine",
issn = "0749-3797",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Behavior change intervention research in healthcare settings

T2 - A review of recent reports with emphasis on external validity

AU - Glasgow, Russell E.

AU - Bull, Sheana S.

AU - Gillette, Cynthia

AU - Klesges, Lisa M.

AU - Dzewaltowski, David A.

PY - 2002/1/1

Y1 - 2002/1/1

N2 - Background: Information to judge both the internal and external validity of health behavior research conducted in healthcare settings is vital to translate research findings to practice. This paper reviews the extent to which this research has reported on elements of internal and external validity, with emphasis on the extent to which research has been conducted in representative settings with representative populations. Methods: A comprehensive review was conducted of controlled interventions for dietary change, physical activity, or smoking cessation conducted in healthcare settings and published in 12 leading health behavior journals between 1996 and 2000. Using the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework, the characteristics and results of these studies were summarized to document the extent to which intervention reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance were reported and what has been learned about each of these dimensions. Results: A total of 36 studies qualified for review. Participation rates among eligible patients were reported in 69% of studies and were generally quite high; in contrast, only 30% of studies reported on participation rates among either healthcare settings or providers. Implementation data were reported in 77% of the studies and these rates were generally high, with the caveat that intervention was often delivered by paid research staff. Long-term maintenance results were reported very consistently at the individual level, but program continuation was almost never reported at the setting level. Conclusions: We conclude that a much stronger emphasis needs to be placed on the representativeness of providers and settings that are studied. Examples of how this can be done and recommendations for future research are provided.

AB - Background: Information to judge both the internal and external validity of health behavior research conducted in healthcare settings is vital to translate research findings to practice. This paper reviews the extent to which this research has reported on elements of internal and external validity, with emphasis on the extent to which research has been conducted in representative settings with representative populations. Methods: A comprehensive review was conducted of controlled interventions for dietary change, physical activity, or smoking cessation conducted in healthcare settings and published in 12 leading health behavior journals between 1996 and 2000. Using the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework, the characteristics and results of these studies were summarized to document the extent to which intervention reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance were reported and what has been learned about each of these dimensions. Results: A total of 36 studies qualified for review. Participation rates among eligible patients were reported in 69% of studies and were generally quite high; in contrast, only 30% of studies reported on participation rates among either healthcare settings or providers. Implementation data were reported in 77% of the studies and these rates were generally high, with the caveat that intervention was often delivered by paid research staff. Long-term maintenance results were reported very consistently at the individual level, but program continuation was almost never reported at the setting level. Conclusions: We conclude that a much stronger emphasis needs to be placed on the representativeness of providers and settings that are studied. Examples of how this can be done and recommendations for future research are provided.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036289619&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036289619&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00437-3

DO - 10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00437-3

M3 - Review article

C2 - 12093425

AN - SCOPUS:0036289619

VL - 23

SP - 62

EP - 69

JO - American Journal of Preventive Medicine

JF - American Journal of Preventive Medicine

SN - 0749-3797

IS - 1

ER -