Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25608667›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2015

Be SMART: examining the experience of implementing the NHS Health Check in UK primary care.

Rachel L Shaw, Helen M Pattison, Carol Holland, Richard Cooke

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
28.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 213 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Understanding Motivation to Adhere to Guidelines for Alcohol Intake, Physical Activity, and Fruit and Vegetable Intake Among U.K. University Students.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rachel L ShawSchool of Life & Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK. r.l.shaw@aston.ac.uk.
Helen M PattisonSchool of Life & Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK. h.m.pattison@aston.ac.uk.
Carol HollandSchool of Life & Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK. c.holland1@aston.ac.uk.
Richard CookeSchool of Life & Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK. r.cooke@aston.ac.uk.
Aston University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe NHS Health Check was designed by UK Department of Health to address increased prevalence of cardiovascular disease by identifying risk levels and facilitating behaviour change. It constituted biomedical testing, personalised advice and lifestyle support. The objective of the study was to explore Health Care Professionals' (HCPs) and patients' experiences of delivering and receiving the NHS Health Check in an inner-city region of England.

methodsPatients and HCPs in primary care were interviewed using semi-structured schedules. Data were analysed using Thematic Analysis.

resultsFour themes were identified. Firstly, Health Check as a test of 'roadworthiness' for people. The roadworthiness metaphor resonated with some patients but it signified a passive stance toward illness. Some patients described the check as useful in the theme, Health check as revelatory. HCPs found visual aids demonstrating levels of salt/fat/sugar in everyday foods and a 'traffic light' tape measure helpful in communicating such 'revelations' with patients. Being SMART and following the protocolrevealed that few HCPs used SMART goals and few patients spoke of them. HCPs require training to understand their rationale compared with traditional advice-giving. The need for further follow-up revealed disparity in follow-ups and patients were not systematically monitored over time.

conclusionsHCPs' training needs to include the use and evidence of the effectiveness of SMART goals in changing health behaviours. The significance of fidelity to protocol needs to be communicated to HCPs and commissioners to ensure consistency. Monitoring and measurement of follow-up, e.g., tracking of referrals, need to be resourced to provide evidence of the success of the NHS Health Check in terms of healthier lifestyles and reduced CVD risk.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorState MedicineCardiovascular DiseasesChecklistDietGeneral PracticeHealth PromotionHumansLife StylePrimary Health CareProgram DevelopmentQualitative ResearchRisk FactorsRisk Reduction BehaviorSmoking CessationUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID25608667
PMCPMC4308836
OpenAlexW2053893706

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.