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  Effective interventions are needed to support health behaviour change for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. Decision tools encourage behaviour change but their effectiveness when used in shared decision-making with health professionals (HPs) is unknown.    Aim  To test the feasibility of using a novel, paper-based tool for shared decision-making in initiating behaviour change.    Design & setting  A feasibility study in five general practices in Northern Ireland.    Method  Adults with, or at high risk of, CVD were invited to discuss their diet and physical activity (PA) with an HP. Using a paper-based decision aid in shared decision-making about behaviour change, their capabilities, opportunities, and motivation were considered. Diet and PA were assessed at baseline, 1, and 3 months using the Dietary Instrument for Nutritional Education (DINE) and the Recent Physical Activity Questionnaire (RPAQ); accelerometers measured PA at baseline and 3 months. Semi-structured interviews, analysed thematically, explored participants’ and HPs’ views of the process.    Results  The positive response rate to study invitation was 28% (45/162); 23 were recruited (aged 43–74 years; 50% male; <40% met diet or PA recommendations); and 87% (20/23) completed the study. All interviewees valued the tool’s structure, succinct content, and facilitation of discussion. HPs’ sharing of relevant personal experience encouraged behaviour change; social responsibilities, health conditions, and beliefs restricted change. HPs’ workloads prohibited the tool’s routine use.    Conclusion  Recruitment and completion rates suggest that using a novel, paper-based tool in shared decision-making for behaviour change is feasible. HPs’ workloads constrain its use in practice, but qualitative findings indicate its potential value. Cross-sector collaborative exploration of sustainable models to promote behaviour change is needed.

Shared decision-making (SHARE-D) for healthy behaviour change: a feasibility study in general practice