Table 1

Summary of selected health behaviour theories*

Model
Author
Meta-analyses examining the model
Evidence supporting theory

Biomedical

None identified (NI)

BLT
Skinner, 1953
NI

Communication

NI

HBM
Rosenstock et al. 1966
1. 30
2. 31
1. 46 studies- substantial empirical support.
2. 16 studies; at best 10% of variance accounted for by any one dimension of the theory.
SCT
Bandura 1950's
38
27 studies; self-efficacy explained between 4% and 26% of variance
TRA
Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975
41
Theory explains about 25% of variance in behaviour from intention alone, and explains slightly less than 50% of variance in intentions.
TPB
Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975
1.43
2. 44
3. 45
1. 13 studies; 75% of interventions effected a change in behaviour in desired direction.
2. 56 studies; About a third of the variations in behaviour can be explained by the combined effect of intention and perceived behavioural control in the domain of health.
3. 185 independent empirical tests: combined effect of intention and perceived behavioural control explained about a third of variation in behaviour. Theory can explain 20% of prospective measures of actual behaviour.
PMT
Rogers, 1975
35
65 studies – Moderate effects in predicting behaviour.
Self-regulation
Leventhal et al. 1980
NI

IMB
Fisher and Fisher 1992
NI

TTM
Prochaska & DiClemente 1983
1. 58
2. 59
1. Stage based interventions not more effective at increasing smoking cessation than non-stage based interventions.
2. 91 independent samples. Results support that individuals use all 10 processes of change.

* The studies included in most of these meta-analyses covered a wide range of content areas, most not directly related to adherence behaviour. Readers are encouraged to consult the original source for topic coverage.

Munro et al. BMC Public Health 2007 7:104   doi:10.1186/1471-2458-7-104