17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      An ontology-based modelling system (OBMS) for representing behaviour change theories applied to 76 theories

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: To efficiently search, compare, test and integrate behaviour change theories, they need to be specified in a way that is clear, consistent and computable. An ontology-based modelling system (OBMS) has previously been shown to be able to represent five commonly used theories in this way. We aimed to assess whether the OBMS could be applied more widely and to create a database of behaviour change theories, their constructs and propositions.

          Methods: We labelled the constructs within 71 theories and used the OBMS to represent the relationships between the constructs. Diagrams of each theory were sent to authors or experts for feedback and amendment. The 71 finalised diagrams plus the five previously generated diagrams were used to create a searchable database of 76 theories in the form of construct-relationship-construct triples. We conducted a set of illustrative analyses to characterise theories in the database.

          Results: All 71 theories could be satisfactorily represented using this system. In total, 35 (49%) were finalised with no or very minor amendment. The remaining 36 (51%) were finalised after changes to the constructs (seven theories), relationships between constructs (15 theories) or both (14 theories) following author/expert feedback. The mean number of constructs per theory was 20 (min. = 6, max. = 72), with the mean number of triples per theory 31 (min. = 7, max. = 89). Fourteen distinct relationship types were used, of which the most commonly used was ‘influences’, followed by ‘part of’.

          Conclusions: The OBMS can represent a wide array of behavioural theories in a precise, computable format. This system should provide a basis for better integration and synthesis of theories than has hitherto been possible.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The theory of planned behavior

          Icek Ajzen (1991)
          Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance

            Evaluating complex interventions is complicated. The Medical Research Council's evaluation framework (2000) brought welcome clarity to the task. Now the council has updated its guidance
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions.

              CONSORT guidelines call for precise reporting of behavior change interventions: we need rigorous methods of characterizing active content of interventions with precision and specificity. The objective of this study is to develop an extensive, consensually agreed hierarchically structured taxonomy of techniques [behavior change techniques (BCTs)] used in behavior change interventions. In a Delphi-type exercise, 14 experts rated labels and definitions of 124 BCTs from six published classification systems. Another 18 experts grouped BCTs according to similarity of active ingredients in an open-sort task. Inter-rater agreement amongst six researchers coding 85 intervention descriptions by BCTs was assessed. This resulted in 93 BCTs clustered into 16 groups. Of the 26 BCTs occurring at least five times, 23 had adjusted kappas of 0.60 or above. "BCT taxonomy v1," an extensive taxonomy of 93 consensually agreed, distinct BCTs, offers a step change as a method for specifying interventions, but we anticipate further development and evaluation based on international, interdisciplinary consensus.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Data CurationRole: Formal AnalysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project AdministrationRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Data CurationRole: Formal AnalysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding AcquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project AdministrationRole: SupervisionRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data CurationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project AdministrationRole: SupervisionRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Data CurationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project AdministrationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Data CurationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project AdministrationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Data CurationRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project AdministrationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Data CurationRole: InvestigationRole: Project AdministrationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Data CurationRole: InvestigationRole: Project AdministrationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: Data CurationRole: InvestigationRole: Project AdministrationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding AcquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: Project AdministrationRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Journal
                Wellcome Open Res
                Wellcome Open Res
                Wellcome Open Res
                Wellcome Open Research
                F1000 Research Limited (London, UK )
                2398-502X
                23 July 2020
                2020
                : 5
                : 177
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London, London, UK
                [2 ]Research Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, University College London, London, UK
                [3 ]Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA
                [4 ]Católica Research Centre for Psychological, Family and Social Wellbeing, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Lisboa, Portugal
                [5 ]Center for Research and Social Intervention, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
                [6 ]NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
                [1 ]Department of Psychology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, USA
                [1 ]Institute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
                Author notes

                No competing interests were disclosed.

                Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

                Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3610-8411
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2236-8506
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4207-9872
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1834-9086
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0063-6378
                Article
                10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16121.1
                7653641
                33215048
                ba11f64a-af07-4426-aee4-272892378ccf
                Copyright: © 2020 Hale J et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 16 July 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: Wellcome Trust
                Award ID: 201524
                Award ID: 209387
                This work was supported by Wellcome [201524; 209387].
                The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Articles

                behaviour,behaviour change,theory,ontology,modelling,theoretical synthesis

                Comments

                Comment on this article