↓ Skip to main content

A theory-based online health behaviour intervention for new university students (U@Uni:LifeGuide): results from a repeat randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
345 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
A theory-based online health behaviour intervention for new university students (U@Uni:LifeGuide): results from a repeat randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13063-015-1092-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Cameron, Tracy Epton, Paul Norman, Paschal Sheeran, Peter R. Harris, Thomas L. Webb, Steven A. Julious, Alan Brennan, Chloe Thomas, Andrea Petroczi, Declan Naughton, Iltaf Shah

Abstract

This paper reports the results of a repeat trial assessing the effectiveness of an online theory-based intervention to promote healthy lifestyle behaviours in new university students. The original trial found that the intervention reduced the number of smokers at 6-month follow-up compared with the control condition, but had non-significant effects on the other targeted health behaviours. However, the original trial suffered from low levels of engagement, which the repeat trial sought to rectify. Three weeks before staring university, all incoming undergraduate students at a large university in the UK were sent an email inviting them to participate in the study. After completing a baseline questionnaire, participants were randomly allocated to intervention or control conditions. The intervention consisted of a self-affirmation manipulation, health messages based on the theory of planned behaviour and implementation intention tasks. Participants were followed-up 1 and 6 months after starting university. The primary outcome measures were portions of fruit and vegetables consumed, physical activity levels, units of alcohol consumed and smoking status at 6-month follow-up. The study recruited 2,621 students (intervention n = 1346, control n = 1275), of whom 1495 completed at least one follow-up (intervention n = 696, control n = 799). Intention-to-treat analyses indicated that the intervention had a non-significant effect on the primary outcomes, although the effect of the intervention on fruit and vegetable intake was significant in the per-protocol analyses. Secondary analyses revealed that the intervention had significant effects on having smoked at university (self-report) and on a biochemical marker of alcohol use. Despite successfully increasing levels of engagement, the intervention did not have a significant effect on the primary outcome measures. The relatively weak effects of the intervention, found in both the original and repeat trials, may be due to the focus on multiple versus single health behaviours. Future interventions targeting the health behaviour of new university students should therefore focus on single health behaviours. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN07407344 .

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 345 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 343 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 54 16%
Student > Bachelor 45 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 10%
Researcher 30 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 6%
Other 57 17%
Unknown 104 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 61 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 49 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 41 12%
Social Sciences 18 5%
Sports and Recreations 17 5%
Other 48 14%
Unknown 111 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 December 2015.
All research outputs
#15,306,718
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#23
of 45 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,010
of 397,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#35
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 45 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one scored the same or higher as 22 of them.
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 397,897 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.