Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Use of Health Behavior Theory in Funded Grant Proposals: Cancer Screening Interventions as a Case Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Background

Interventions using theory should change behavior and identify both mechanisms of effect and necessary conditions. To date, inconsistent description of “use of theory” has limited understanding of how theory improves intervention impact.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to describe the use of theory in health behavior intervention development by coding grant proposals.

Methods

We developed an abstraction tool to characterize investigators, interventions, and theory use and identified seven core elements describing both how and how much theory was used. We used the tool to review and code NCI’s funded cancer screening intervention R01 proposals, 1998–2009.

Results

Of 116 proposals, 38 met criteria; all but one described a conceptual model unique to the proposed research. Few proposals included plans to identify mechanisms of effect or conditions necessary for intervention effectiveness.

Conclusions

Cancer screening intervention grant proposals rarely use theory in ways that advance behavioral or theoretical sciences. Proposed core elements may classify and synthesize the use of theory in behavioral intervention research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bartholomew LK, Mullen PD. Five roles for using theory and evidence in the design and testing of behavior change interventions. J Public Health Dent. 2011; 71(s1): S20-S33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rimer BK, Glanz K, Rasband G. Searching for evidence about health education and behavior interventions. Health Educ Behav. 2001; 28(2): 231-248.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rothman AJ. Exploring connections between moderators and mediators: Commentary on subgroup analyses in intervention research. Prev Sci. 2013; 14I: 189-192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Glanz K, Bishop DB. The role of behavioral science theory in development and implementation of public health interventions. Am Rev Public Health. 2010; 31: 399-418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bowen DJ, Allen JD, Vu T, et al. Theoretical foundations for interventions designed to promote informed decision making for cancer screening. Ann Behav Med. 2006; 32(3): 202-210.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yabroff KR, Mandelblatt JS. Interventions targeted toward patients to increase mammography use. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999; 8(9): 749-757.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yabroff KR, O’Malley A, Mangan P, et al. Inreach and outreach interventions to improve mammography use. J Am Med Womens Assoc. 2001; 56(4): 166-173.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Webb TL, Joseph J, Yardley L, et al. Using the Internet to promote health behaviour change: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of theoretical basis, use of behaviour change techniques, and mode of delivery on efficacy. J Med Internet Res. 2010; 12(1): 6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jeffery RW. How can health behavior theory be made more useful for intervention research? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2004; 1: 10.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rothman AJ. “Is there nothing more practical than a good theory?”: Why innovations and advances in health behavior change will arise if interventions are used to test and refine theory. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2004; 1: 11.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Painter JE, Borba CPC, Hynes M, et al. The use of theory in health behavior research from 2000–2005. Ann Behav Med. 2008; 35: 358-362.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Michie S, Hardeman W, Fanshawe T, et al. Investigating theoretical explanations for behaviour change: The case study of ProActive. Psychol Health. 2008; 23(1): 25-39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Noar SM, Zimmerman RS. Health behavior theory and cumulative knowledge regarding health behaviors: are we moving in the right direction? Health Educ Res. 2005; 20(3): 275-290.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Michie S, Prestwich A. Are interventions theory based? Development of a coding scheme. Health Psychol. 2010; 29(1): 1-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Michie S, Abraham C, Eccles MP, et al. Strengthening evaluation and implementation by specifying components of behaviour change interventions: A study protocol. Implement Sci. 2011; 6: 10.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterizing and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci. 2011; 6(42): 6-42.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Michie S, Johnston M, Francis J, et al. From theory to intervention: Mapping theoretically derived behavioural determinants to behavior change techniques. Appl Psychol. 2008; 57(4): 660-680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Michie S, Ashford S, Sniehotta FF, et al. A refined taxonomy of behaviour change techniques to help people change their physical activity and health eating behaviours: The CALO-RE taxonomy. Psychol Health. 2011; 26(11): 1479-1498.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pinto BM, Floyd A. Theories underlying health promotion interventions among cancer survivors. Semin Oncol Nurs. 2008; 24(3): 153-163.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Meissner HI, Smith RA, Rimer BK, et al. Promoting cancer screening: Learning from experience. Cancer. 2004; 101(S5): 1107-1117.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. USPSTF, http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/adultrec.htm#cancer.

  22. National Cancer Institute. Theories at a glance: A guide for health promotion practice, (second edition). NIH Publication 2005 No. 05–3896.

  23. Earp JA, Ennett ST. Conceptual models for health education research and practice. Health Educ Res. 1991; 6(2): 163-171.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. SAS version 9.2, SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina.

  25. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1983; 51: 390-395.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rosenstock IM. What research in motivation suggest for public health. Am J Public Health. 1960; 50: 295-301.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Weinstein ND, Sandman PM. A model of the precaution adoption process: Evidence from home radon test. Health Psychol. 1992; 11: 170-180.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall; 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991; 50: 179-211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. MacKinnon DP, Fairchild AJ, Fritz MS. Mediation analysis. Annu Rev Psychol. 2007; 58: 593-614.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Brewer NT, Gilkey MB. Comparing theories of health behavior using data from longitudinal studies: A comment on Gerend and Shepherd. Ann Behav Med. 2012; 44(2): 147-148.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Weinstein ND. Testing four competing theories of health-protective behavior. Health Psychol. 1993; 12(4): 324-333.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Noar SM, Mehrotra P. Toward a new methodological paradigm for testing theories of health behavior and health behavior change. Patient Educ Couns. 2011; 82(3): 468-474.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tiro JA, Diamond PM, Perz CA, et al. Validation of scales measuring attitudes and norms related to mammography screening in women veterans. Health Psychol. 2005; 24(6): 555-566.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Trost Z. Models under scrutiny: The strengths and limitations of our theoretical frameworks: A commentary on Holla et al. Ann Behav Med. 2012; 44(1): 5-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Reid AE, Aiken LS. Integration of five health behaviour models: common strengths and unique contributions to understanding condom use. Psychol Health. 2011; 26(11): 1499-1520.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Murphy CC, Vernon SW, Diamond PM, et al. Competitive testing of health behavior theories: How do benefits, barriers, subjective norm, and intention influence mammography behavior? Ann Behav Med. 2014; 47(1): 120-129.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Spencer JS, Zanna MP, Fong GT. Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005; 89(6): 845-851.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Collins LM, Murphy SA, Strecher V. The multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) and the sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART): New methods for more potent eHealth interventions. Am J Prev Med. 2007; 32(5): S112-S118.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bauman AE, Sallis JF, Dzewaltowski DA, et al. Toward a better understanding of the influences on physical activity: The role of determinants, correlates, causal variables, mediators, moderators, and confounders. Am J Prev Med. 2002; 23(Suppl): 5-14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Drucker DD, Preacher KJ, Tormala ZL, et al. Mediation analysis and social psychology: Current practices and new recommendations. Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2011; 5(6): 359-371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Baranowski T, Cullen KW, Nicklas T, et al. Are current health behavioral change models helpful in guiding prevention of weight gain efforts? Obes Res J. 2003; 11(S10): 23S-43S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Rimer, Glanz, Viswanath Eds. Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice, 4th Edition. 2008.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the essential contributions of Jane Zapka, a practical intervention expert who helped with many aspects of the project.

Authors’ Statement of Conflict of Interest and Adherence to Ethical Standards

Authors Sarah Kobrin, Rebecca Ferrer, Helen Meissner, Jasmin Tiro, Kara Hall, Dikla Shmueli-Blumberg, and Alexander Rothman all declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

No human subjects were used in this analysis of existing documents.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Behavioral Research Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Sarah Kobrin PhD, MPH, Rebecca Ferrer PhD & Kara Hall PhD

  2. Office of Disease Prevention, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Helen Meissner PhD

  3. Division of Behavioral and Communication Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA

    Jasmin Tiro PhD

  4. The Emmes Corporation, Rockville, MD, USA

    Dikla Shmueli-Blumberg PhD

  5. Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Alex Rothman PhD

Authors
  1. Sarah Kobrin PhD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rebecca Ferrer PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Helen Meissner PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jasmin Tiro PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kara Hall PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dikla Shmueli-Blumberg PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Alex Rothman PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Kobrin PhD, MPH.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOCX 37 kb)

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kobrin, S., Ferrer, R., Meissner, H. et al. Use of Health Behavior Theory in Funded Grant Proposals: Cancer Screening Interventions as a Case Study. ann. behav. med. 49, 809–818 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-015-9714-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-015-9714-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation