↓ Skip to main content

Readiness to Change Over Time: Change Commitment and Change Efficacy in a Workplace Health-Promotion Trial

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Readiness to Change Over Time: Change Commitment and Change Efficacy in a Workplace Health-Promotion Trial
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, April 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00110
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian D. Helfrich, Marlana J. Kohn, Austin Stapleton, Claire L. Allen, Kristen Elizabeth Hammerback, K. C. Gary Chan, Amanda T. Parrish, Daron E. Ryan, Bryan J. Weiner, Jeffrey R. Harris, Peggy A. Hannon

Abstract

Organizational readiness to change may be a key determinant of implementation success and a mediator of the effectiveness of implementation interventions. If organizational readiness can be reliably and validly assessed at the outset of a change initiative, it could be used to assess the effectiveness of implementation-support activities by measuring changes in readiness factors over time. We analyzed two waves of readiness-to-change survey data collected as part of a three-arm, randomized controlled trial to implement evidence-based health promotion practices in small worksites in low-wage industries. We measured five readiness factors: context (favorable broader conditions); change valence (valuing health promotion); information assessment (demands and resources to implement health promotion); change commitment (an intention to implement health promotion); and change efficacy (a belief in shared ability to implement health promotion). We expected commitment and efficacy to increase at intervention sites along with their self-reported effort to implement health promotion practices, termed wellness-program effort. We compared means between baseline and 15 months, and between intervention and control sites. We used linear regression to test whether intervention and control sites differed in their change-readiness scores over time. Only context and change commitment met reliability thresholds. Change commitment declined significantly for both control (-0.39) and interventions sites (-0.29) from baseline to 15 months, while context did not change for either. Only wellness program effort at 15 months, but not at baseline, differed significantly between control and intervention sites (1.20 controls, 2.02 intervention). Regression analyses resulted in two significant differences between intervention and control sites in changes from baseline to 15 months: (1) intervention sites exhibited significantly smaller change in context scores relative to control sites over time and (2) intervention sites exhibited significantly higher changes in wellness program effort relative to control sites. Contrary to our hypothesis, change commitment declined significantly at both Healthlinks and control sites, even as wellness-program effort increased significantly at HealthLinks sites. Regression to the mean may explain the decline in change commitment. Future research needs to assess whether baseline commitment is an independent predictor of wellness-program effort or an effect modifier of the HealthLinks intervention.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Other 4 4%
Researcher 4 4%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 36 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 17 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 10%
Social Sciences 10 10%
Psychology 8 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 41 40%
Attention Score in Context

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 22 June 2018.
All research outputs
#4,129,119
of 24,618,500 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#1,732
of 12,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,935
of 331,420 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#42
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,618,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,843 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 331,420 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.