↓ Skip to main content

Can Communicating Personalised Disease Risk Promote Healthy Behaviour Change? A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Behavioral Medicine, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#40 of 1,495)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
256 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
116 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
190 Mendeley
Title
Can Communicating Personalised Disease Risk Promote Healthy Behaviour Change? A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews
Published in
Annals of Behavioral Medicine, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12160-017-9895-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

David P French, Elaine Cameron, Jack S Benton, Christi Deaton, Michelle Harvie

Abstract

The assessment and communication of disease risk that is personalised to the individual is widespread in healthcare contexts. Despite several systematic reviews of RCTs, it is unclear under what circumstances that personalised risk estimates promotes change in four key health-related behaviours: smoking, physical activity, diet and alcohol consumption. The present research aims to systematically identify, evaluate and synthesise the findings of existing systematic reviews. This systematic review of systematic reviews followed published guidance. A search of four databases and two-stage screening procedure with good reliability identified nine eligible systematic reviews. The nine reviews each included between three and 15 primary studies, containing 36 unique studies. Methods of personalising risk feedback included imaging/visual feedback, genetic testing, and numerical estimation from risk algorithms. The reviews were generally high quality. For a broad range of methods of estimating and communicating risk, the reviews found no evidence that risk information had strong or consistent effects on health-related behaviours. The most promising effects came from interventions using visual or imaging techniques and with smoking cessation and dietary behaviour as outcomes, but with inconsistent results. Few interventions explicitly used theory, few targeted self-efficacy or response efficacy, and a limited range of Behaviour Change Techniques were used. Presenting risk information on its own, even when highly personalised, does not produce strong effects on health-related behaviours or changes which are sustained. Future research in this area should build on the existing knowledge base about increasing the effects of risk communication on behaviour.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 256 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 190 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 189 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 34 18%
Student > Master 31 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 15%
Student > Bachelor 13 7%
Other 12 6%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 49 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 21%
Psychology 29 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Other 25 13%
Unknown 69 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 180. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 August 2021.
All research outputs
#226,790
of 25,711,518 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#40
of 1,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,801
of 323,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Behavioral Medicine
#1
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,711,518 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,495 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,430 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.