↓ Skip to main content

The effectiveness of motivational interviewing for health behaviour change in primary care settings: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Health Psychology Review, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
196 Mendeley
Title
The effectiveness of motivational interviewing for health behaviour change in primary care settings: a systematic review
Published in
Health Psychology Review, February 2014
DOI 10.1080/17437199.2014.882006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katie Morton, Mark Beauchamp, Anna Prothero, Lauren Joyce, Laura Saunders, Sarah Spencer-Bowdage, Bernadette Dancy, Charles Pedlar

Abstract

Motivational interviewing (MI) is a patient-centred approach to behaviour change that was originally developed in the addiction field but has increasingly been applied to public health settings with a focus on health promotion. The purpose of this review was to examine the evidence base for MI interventions in primary care settings with non-clinical populations to achieve behaviour change for physical activity, dietary behaviours and/or alcohol intake. We also sought to explore the specific behaviour change techniques included in MI interventions within primary care. Electronic databases were searched for relevant articles and 33 papers met inclusion criteria and were included. Approximately 50% of the included studies (n = 18) demonstrated positive effects in relation to health behaviour change. The efficacy of MI approaches is unclear given the inconsistency of MI descriptions and intervention components. Furthermore, research designs that do not isolate the effects of MI make it difficult to determine the effectiveness of such approaches. We offer a number of recommendations for researchers and practitioners seeking to include MI within behaviour change interventions to help improve the quality of the research and the effectiveness of MI-based interventions within primary care settings.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 1%
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 190 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 22%
Researcher 39 20%
Student > Bachelor 38 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 12%
Unspecified 17 9%
Other 35 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 47 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 46 23%
Psychology 39 20%
Unspecified 24 12%
Sports and Recreations 16 8%
Other 24 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 23 June 2016.
All research outputs
#1,817,102
of 13,047,730 outputs
Outputs from Health Psychology Review
#116
of 208 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,588
of 242,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Psychology Review
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,047,730 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 208 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.5. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 242,321 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.