Evidence Hub

Effective techniques in healthy eating and physical activity interventions: a meta-regression

Michie S, Abraham C, Whittington C, McAteer J, Gupta S

Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association, 2009

44,747 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Meta-analyses of behavior change (BC) interventions typically find large heterogeneity in effectiveness and small effects. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of active BC interventions designed to promote physical activity and healthy eating and investigate whether theoretically specified BC techniques improve outcome.

DESIGN: Interventions, evaluated in experimental or quasi-experimental studies, using behavioral and/or cognitive techniques to increase physical activity and healthy eating in adults, were systematically reviewed. Intervention content was reliably classified into 26 BC techniques and the effects of individual techniques, and of a theoretically derived combination of self-regulation techniques, were assessed using meta-regression.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Valid outcomes of physical activity and healthy eating.

RESULTS: The 122 evaluations (N = 44,747) produced an overall pooled effect size of 0.31 (95% confidence interval = 0.26 to 0.36, I(2) = 69%). The technique, "self-monitoring," explained the greatest amount of among-study heterogeneity (13%). Interventions that combined self-monitoring with at least one other technique derived from control theory were significantly more effective than the other interventions (0.42 vs. 0.26).

CONCLUSION: Classifying interventions according to component techniques and theoretically derived technique combinations and conducting meta-regression enabled identification of effective components of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 44,747 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free