Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2016
An online skin cancer risk-reduction intervention for young adults: Mechanisms of effects.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Heckman Carolyn J, Handorf Elizabeth A, Darlow Susan D, Ritterband Lee M, Manne Sharon L
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The study's purpose was to investigate moderator, implementation, and mediator variables related to the efficacy of UV4.me, an Internet intervention that decreased ultraviolet radiation (UV) exposure and increased skin protection behaviors among young adults.
METHOD: A total of 965 18-25 year olds at risk for skin cancer were recruited nationally online. Participants were randomized to an experimental website (UV4.me), a control website, or assessment only. Participant characteristics (moderators), engagement with and perceptions of interventions (implementation measures), and exposure and protection attitudinal variables (mediators) were assessed. Linear regression and mediation analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: Intervention effects on skin protection were greater for participants with a family history of skin cancer (p = .01). Intervention effects on UV exposure were greater among recent indoor tanners (p = .04). Improvements in skin protection (but not UV exposure) were associated with perceiving the interventions as satisfying or helpful (ps < .01). The experimental group had better outcomes if they completed more modules (ps < .01) or set more behavioral goals (ps < .01). Knowledge and exposure decisional balance mediated intervention effects for UV exposure (ps < .05), and protection decisional balance, self-efficacy, and intentions mediated intervention effects for protection (ps < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: The experimental intervention was more efficacious for certain high risk groups. The more individuals liked and engaged with the interventions (e.g., by setting goals), the better their outcomes. Mediation results inform theory about change mechanisms and differed by behavioral outcome. (PsycINFO Database Record
METHOD: A total of 965 18-25 year olds at risk for skin cancer were recruited nationally online. Participants were randomized to an experimental website (UV4.me), a control website, or assessment only. Participant characteristics (moderators), engagement with and perceptions of interventions (implementation measures), and exposure and protection attitudinal variables (mediators) were assessed. Linear regression and mediation analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: Intervention effects on skin protection were greater for participants with a family history of skin cancer (p = .01). Intervention effects on UV exposure were greater among recent indoor tanners (p = .04). Improvements in skin protection (but not UV exposure) were associated with perceiving the interventions as satisfying or helpful (ps < .01). The experimental group had better outcomes if they completed more modules (ps < .01) or set more behavioral goals (ps < .01). Knowledge and exposure decisional balance mediated intervention effects for UV exposure (ps < .05), and protection decisional balance, self-efficacy, and intentions mediated intervention effects for protection (ps < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: The experimental intervention was more efficacious for certain high risk groups. The more individuals liked and engaged with the interventions (e.g., by setting goals), the better their outcomes. Mediation results inform theory about change mechanisms and differed by behavioral outcome. (PsycINFO Database Record