Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25636330›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2015

Acceptability of financial incentives and penalties for encouraging uptake of healthy behaviours: focus groups.

Emma L Giles, Falko F Sniehotta, Elaine McColl, Jean Adams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Incentives for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Incentives for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Emma L GilesInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE2 4AX, UK. e.l.giles@ncl.ac.uk.
Falko F SniehottaInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE2 4AX, UK. falko.sniehotta@ncl.ac.uk.
Elaine McCollNewcastle Clinical Trials Unit, 4th Floor William Leech Building, The Medical School, Framlington Place, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4HH, UK. elaine.mccoll@ncl.ac.uk.
Jean AdamsInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE2 4AX, UK. jma79@medschl.cam.ac.uk.

Funding

Department of Health CDF-2011-04-001Medical Research Council MR/K023187/1Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is evidence that financial incentive interventions, which include both financial rewards and also penalties, are effective in encouraging healthy behaviours. However, concerns about the acceptability of such interventions remain. We report on focus groups with a cross-section of adults from North East England exploring their acceptance of financial incentive interventions for encouraging healthy behaviours amongst adults. Such information should help guide the design and development of acceptable, and effective, financial incentive interventions.

methodsEight focus groups with a total of 74 adults were conducted between November 2013 and January 2014 in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. Focus groups lasted approximately 60 minutes and explored factors that made financial incentives acceptable and unacceptable to participants, together with discussions on preferred formats for financial incentives. Verbatim transcripts were thematically coded and analysed in Nvivo 10.

resultsParticipants largely distrusted health promoting financial incentives, with a concern that individuals may abuse such schemes. There was, however, evidence that health promoting financial incentives may be more acceptable if they are fair to all recipients and members of the public; if they are closely monitored and evaluated; if they are shown to be effective and cost-effective; and if clear health education is provided alongside health promoting financial incentives. There was also a preference for positive rewards rather than negative penalties, and for shopping vouchers rather than cash incentives.

conclusionsThis qualitative empirical research has highlighted clear suggestions on how to design health promoting financial incentives to maximise acceptability to the general public. It will also be important to determine the acceptability of health promoting financial incentives in a range of stakeholders, and in particular, those who fund such schemes, and policy-makers who are likely to be involved with the design, implementation and evaluation of health promoting financial incentive schemes.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorMotivationRewardAdolescentAdultEnglandFemaleFocus GroupsHealth PromotionHumansIncomeMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25636330
PMCPMC4318173

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.