ArticleJournal of prevention (2022)2026
Understanding Underinvestment in Prevention: A Behavioral Perspective.
Article in Journal of prevention (2022), 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although many preventive health interventions are highly cost-effective, participation and sustained engagement remain below recommended levels. This paper advances prevention science by offering a behavioral explanation for underinvestment in prevention at the level of individual preventive behavior, specifically, participation and adherence, rather than system-level funding decisions. Drawing on behavioral economics, it integrates two well-supported mechanisms, present bias and mental accounting, to explain failures both in initiating preventive actions and in maintaining them over time. The central argument is that underinvestment reflects a dual-margin behavioral problem. Mental accounting shapes whether individuals perceive preventive services as affordable in terms of monetary, time, effort, and psychological costs, even in settings where financial prices are zero or services are publicly funded. Present bias influences effort and persistence by causing individuals to overweight immediate inconveniences relative to future health benefits. By explicitly distinguishing individual-level decision-making from policy maker behavior, the framework clarifies its scope and avoids conflating distinct decision problems. Distinguishing between initiation and follow-through helps explain why many prevention policies increase uptake without producing sustained behavior change. The paper offers a conceptual framework for interpreting mixed findings in prevention research and develops testable predictions about when it is better to focus on participation versus adherence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42204082What 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.