ArticleBritish journal of health psychology2026
Acceptability of an online theory-based intervention to support healthcare professionals' delivery of health behaviour change interventions: A theoretically framed qualitative study.
Article in British journal of health psychology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare professionals in the UK's National Health Service (NHS) are encouraged to deliver health behaviour change interventions during routine consultations. 'If-then' planning helps healthcare professionals to work with patients to identify and overcome barriers. However, in order to deploy such interventions, healthcare professionals must find them acceptable.
aimsTo use the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) to understand the acceptability of interventions to support delivery of if-then planning interventions by: (a) exploring healthcare professionals' experiences of an online theory-based intervention which was designed to support them to deliver opportunistic health behaviour change interventions during routine clinical consultations, and (b) understanding the most prominent aspects of intervention acceptability to make recommendations for refinements and implementation.
methodTwenty-six NHS healthcare professionals (including nurses, physiotherapists, dieticians, doctors and midwives) participated in semi-structured interviews. The TFA informed both the design of the interview topic guide and the framework analysis, in which findings were mapped onto the TFA domains.
resultsFive TFA domains were prominent: affective attitude, burden, intervention coherence, perceived effectiveness, and ethicality. There were mixed attitudes, but HCPs were broadly positive (affective attitude), valued the brief format (burden), and felt it aligned with their professional values (ethicality). They understood the intervention (intervention coherence) and believed it addressed barriers to health behaviour change conversations (perceived effectiveness).
conclusionsThe intervention was broadly acceptable to healthcare professionals, with key domains including affective attitude, burden, intervention coherence, perceived effectiveness and ethicality identified as important. These findings provide specific targets for refining the intervention and supporting its implementation in routine healthcare practice.
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.