ArticleHealth psychology and behavioral medicine2026
Theoretical evaluation of mental health first aid using the behavioural change wheel (BCW).
Article in Health psychology and behavioral medicine, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Mental health first aid (MHFA) has gained popularity over the years. This study retrospectively maps the MHFA intervention to characterise its content using the Behavioural Change Wheel to identify the active ingredients and mechanisms of action. Methods: Three data sources formed the data for the current study. Namely, the MHFA training manual, a roleplay video demonstrating how to implement the intervention, and interviews with six participants of whom five were MHFAers and five were MHFA recipients, on their experiences of the MHFA intervention. The interview data source formed part of the EMPOWER trial. The study presented here utilised a two-step approach: a) The MHFA intervention was described using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) framework, and b) the content was analysed to identify the behavioural change techniques (BCTs) using the behavioural change techniques taxonomy version 1 and intervention functions using the behavioural change wheel. The mechanisms of action were specified using the capability, opportunity, motivation model of behaviour and theoretical domains framework. Results: Twelve BCTs and four intervention functions were identified across the three data sources. Only social support BCTs and the intervention functions of enablement and persuasion were consistently identified across the three data sources in the MHFA. The most frequent mechanisms of action were reflective motivation (particularly 'beliefs about capabilities' and 'goals') and social opportunity (particularly 'social influences'). Conclusions: The MHFA intervention incorporates BCTs to increase reflective motivation and social opportunity to seek help for mental health concerns. However, psychological capability and physical opportunity need to be addressed to enhance help-seeking behaviours in those experiencing mental health difficulties. Future research should evaluate the impact of integrating additional BCTs and intervention functions into the MHFA programme to determine the most effective combination for promoting help-seeking behaviour and improving mental health outcomes.
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.