Do automated digital health behaviour change interventions have a positive effect on self-efficacy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Issue 1 (2nd January 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Newby, Katie; Teah, Grace; Cooke, Richard; Li, Xinru; Brown, Katherine; Salisbury-Finch, Bradley; Kwah, Kayleigh; Bartle, Naomi; Curtis, Kristina; Fulton, Emmie; Parsons, Joanne; Dusseldorp, Elise; Williams, Stefanie L.
• Is Part Of: Health psychology review. Volume 15:Issue 1(2021)
• Page Start: 140
• Page End: 158
• Publication Date: 2021-01-02
• Subjects: Self-efficacy -- digital -- health behaviour -- behaviour change techniques; Clinical health psychology -- Periodicals; 613.019
• DOI: 10.1080/17437199.2019.1705873
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1743-7199

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Self-efficacy is an important determinant of health behaviour. Digital interventions are a potentially acceptable and cost-effective way of delivering programmes of health behaviour change at scale. Whether behaviour change interventions work to increase self-efficacy in this context is unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to identify whether automated digital interventions are associated with positive changes in self-efficacy amongst non-clinical populations for five major health behaviours, and which BCTs are associated with that change. A systematic literature search identified 20 studies ( n = 5624) that assessed changes in self-efficacy and were included in a random-effects meta-analysis. Interventions targeted: healthy eating ( k = 4), physical activity ( k = 9), sexual behaviour ( k = 3) and smoking ( k = 4). No interventions targeting alcohol use were identified. Overall, interventions had a small, positive effect on self-efficacy ( g ¯ = 0.190, C I [ 0.078 ; 0.303 ] ) . The effect of interventions on self-efficacy did not differ as a function of health behaviour type ( Q -between = 7.3704, p = .061, df = 3). Inclusion of the BCT 'information about social and environmental consequences' had a small, negative effect on self-efficacy ( Δ g ¯ = − 0.297, Q = 7.072, p = .008 ) . Whilst this review indicates that digital interventions can be used to change self-efficacy, which techniques work best in this context is not clear.