English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background The rising burden of chronic diseases poses a challenge for the whole public health system, and to deal with this we need to address the socioeconomic, cultural, and behavioural aspects of health and its determinants. While a change in individual 'lifestyle' factors, such as diet, exercise, smoking, and alcohol are often the target of intervention design, there needs to be an acknowledgement that behavioural science is much more than just 'lifestyle choice' on the individual level. Governments worldwide are increasingly incorporating the behavioural insights approach into policymaking. There has been an increasing interest in 'choice architecture' and 'nudging' to facilitate behaviour (change), often by manipulating elements of the environment. Designing interventions that target the most important determinants of behaviour, based on research evidence in the field of behavioural science, provide the best chance of changing behaviour and demonstrating a positive impact in terms of health outcomes and cost-effectiveness. However, knowing what works and how to apply it presents an ongoing challenge. Results The COM-B, EAST, and MOST are behaviour change models that were built on an impressive effort to synthesize available evidence regarding intervention development frameworks, behaviour change theories, and behaviour change techniques. They tackle determinants of behaviour in terms of capability, opportunity, and motivation on the level of the individual (micro level), alongside ways in which to intervene, at mezzo level (intervention functions) and macro level (policy categories). Conclusions These approaches take a holistic view of interventions and can contribute to the development of new scientific knowledge regarding mechanisms underlying effective knowledge mobilization in behaviour change. They are also expected to further support the adoption of the evidence-based practices within the field of public health.

Applying translational behavioural science to improve people’s health