Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
A Mixed-Methods Cluster Randomised Waitlist-Controlled Trial of a Goal-Based Behaviour Change Intervention Implemented in Workplaces.
Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previous research suggests a goal-based intervention called 'mental contrasting and implementation intentions' improves participants' health and wellbeing. The present study sought to extend these findings to workplaces in the United Kingdom. A mixed-methods cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted with 28 workplaces and 225 staff. All participants deliberated on wishes (potential goals) about improving their health and wellbeing. In the intervention arm, participants were guided to think about the benefits and obstacles to achieving a wish (mental contrasting) and to plan actions to overcome these obstacles (implementation intentions). The results showed no substantive effect of the intervention on average self-reported progress towards what they wished to do for their health and wellbeing four weeks later (mean difference on a 1-7 scale: -0.19; 95% credible interval: -1.08-0.71). Unexpectedly, anxiety increased, and we found evidence that might suggest people identifying as men or of Asian ethnicity made less progress in the intervention group. To explain the results, qualitative focus group data were analysed, guided by normalisation process theory (NPT) and the behaviour change wheel (BCW). Three key themes emerged: insufficient differentiation from other approaches using writing/drawing (NPT), a mismatch between an internal motivational intervention and external barriers (NPT/BCW), and poor timing of opportunities (NPT/BCW). The discussion explores how these results can enhance future workplace health and wellbeing initiatives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.