Marta M Marques1,2,3, Rachel N Carey1, Emma Norris1, Fiona Evans1, Ailbhe N Finnerty1, Janna Hastings1, Ella Jenkins1, Marie Johnston4, Robert West5, Susan Michie1. 1. Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London, London, UK. 2. ADAPT SFI Research Centre, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. 3. Trinity Centre for Healthcare and Practice Innovation, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. 4. Aberdeen Health Psychology Group, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK. 5. Research Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, University College London, London, UK.
Abstract
Background: Investigating and improving the effects of behaviour change interventions requires detailed and consistent specification of all aspects of interventions. An important feature of interventions is the way in which these are delivered, i.e. their mode of delivery. This paper describes an ontology for specifying the mode of delivery of interventions, which forms part of the Behaviour Change Intervention Ontology, currently being developed in the Wellcome Trust funded Human Behaviour-Change Project. Methods: The Mode of Delivery Ontology was developed in an iterative process of annotating behaviour change interventions evaluation reports, and consulting with expert stakeholders. It consisted of seven steps: 1) annotation of 110 intervention reports to develop a preliminary classification of modes of delivery; 2) open review from international experts (n=25); 3) second round of annotations with 55 reports to test inter-rater reliability and identify limitations; 4) second round of expert review feedback (n=16); 5) final round of testing of the refined ontology by two annotators familiar and two annotators unfamiliar with the ontology; 6) specification of ontological relationships between entities; and 7) transformation into a machine-readable format using the Web Ontology Language (OWL) and publishing online. Results: The resulting ontology is a four-level hierarchical structure comprising 65 unique modes of delivery, organised by 15 upper-level classes: Informational , Environmental change, Somatic, Somatic alteration, Individual-based/ Pair-based /Group-based, Uni-directional/Interactional, Synchronous/ Asynchronous, Push/ Pull, Gamification, Arts feature. Relationships between entities consist of is_a. Inter-rater reliability of the Mode of Delivery Ontology for annotating intervention evaluation reports was a=0.80 (very good) for those familiar with the ontology and a= 0.58 (acceptable) for those unfamiliar with it. Conclusion: The ontology can be used for both annotating and writing behaviour change intervention evaluation reports in a consistent and coherent manner, thereby improving evidence comparison, synthesis, replication, and implementation of effective interventions. Copyright:
Background: Investigating and improving the effects of behaviour change interventions requires detailed and consistent specification of all aspects of interventions. An important feature of interventions is the way in which these are delivered, i.e. their mode of delivery. This paper describes an ontology for specifying the mode of delivery of interventions, which forms part of the Behaviour Change Intervention Ontology, currently being developed in the Wellcome Trust funded Human Behaviour-Change Project. Methods: The Mode of Delivery Ontology was developed in an iterative process of annotating behaviour change interventions evaluation reports, and consulting with expert stakeholders. It consisted of seven steps: 1) annotation of 110 intervention reports to develop a preliminary classification of modes of delivery; 2) open review from international experts (n=25); 3) second round of annotations with 55 reports to test inter-rater reliability and identify limitations; 4) second round of expert review feedback (n=16); 5) final round of testing of the refined ontology by two annotators familiar and two annotators unfamiliar with the ontology; 6) specification of ontological relationships between entities; and 7) transformation into a machine-readable format using the Web Ontology Language (OWL) and publishing online. Results: The resulting ontology is a four-level hierarchical structure comprising 65 unique modes of delivery, organised by 15 upper-level classes: Informational , Environmental change, Somatic, Somatic alteration, Individual-based/ Pair-based /Group-based, Uni-directional/Interactional, Synchronous/ Asynchronous, Push/ Pull, Gamification, Arts feature. Relationships between entities consist of is_a. Inter-rater reliability of the Mode of Delivery Ontology for annotating intervention evaluation reports was a=0.80 (very good) for those familiar with the ontology and a= 0.58 (acceptable) for those unfamiliar with it. Conclusion: The ontology can be used for both annotating and writing behaviour change intervention evaluation reports in a consistent and coherent manner, thereby improving evidence comparison, synthesis, replication, and implementation of effective interventions. Copyright:
Authors: Kai R Larsen; Susan Michie; Eric B Hekler; Bryan Gibson; Donna Spruijt-Metz; David Ahern; Heather Cole-Lewis; Rebecca J Bartlett Ellis; Bradford Hesse; Richard P Moser; Jean Yi Journal: J Behav Med Date: 2016-08-01
Authors: Dorothy Newbury-Birch; Simon Coulton; Martin Bland; Paul Cassidy; Veronica Dale; Paolo Deluca; Eilish Gilvarry; Christine Godfrey; Nick Heather; Eileen Kaner; Ruth McGovern; Judy Myles; Adenekan Oyefeso; Steve Parrott; Robert Patton; Katherine Perryman; Tom Phillips; Jonathan Shepherd; Colin Drummond Journal: Alcohol Alcohol Date: 2014-07-26 Impact factor: 2.826
Authors: Susan Michie; Rachel N Carey; Marie Johnston; Alexander J Rothman; Marijn de Bruin; Michael P Kelly; Lauren E Connell Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2018-05-18
Authors: Alison J Wright; Emma Norris; Ailbhe N Finnerty; Marta M Marques; Marie Johnston; Michael P Kelly; Janna Hastings; Robert West; Susan Michie Journal: Wellcome Open Res Date: 2020-06-10
Authors: Gerjo Kok; Nell H Gottlieb; Gjalt-Jorn Y Peters; Patricia Dolan Mullen; Guy S Parcel; Robert A C Ruiter; María E Fernández; Christine Markham; L Kay Bartholomew Journal: Health Psychol Rev Date: 2015-10-15
Authors: Marijn de Bruin; Wolfgang Viechtbauer; Maarten C Eisma; Jamie Hartmann-Boyce; Robert West; Eleanor Bull; Susan Michie; Marie Johnston Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2016-05-04
Authors: Rachel N Carey; Lauren E Connell; Marie Johnston; Alexander J Rothman; Marijn de Bruin; Michael P Kelly; Susan Michie Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2019-07-17
Authors: Rebecca C Jackson; James P Balhoff; Eric Douglass; Nomi L Harris; Christopher J Mungall; James A Overton Journal: BMC Bioinformatics Date: 2019-07-29 Impact factor: 3.169
Authors: Urska Nabergoj Makovec; Catherine Goetzinger; Janette Ribaut; Pilar Barnestein-Fonseca; Frederik Haupenthal; Maria Teresa Herdeiro; Sean Patrick Grant; Cristina Jácome; Fatima Roque; Dins Smits; Ivana Tadic; Alexandra L Dima Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-04-22 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Emily E Giroux; Sheila Casemore; Teren Y Clarke; Christopher B McBride; Kelsey R Wuerstl; Heather L Gainforth Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: Vera-Ellen M Lucci; Rhyann C McKay; Christopher B McBride; Maureen S McGrath; Rhonda Willms; Heather L Gainforth; Victoria E Claydon Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 2.473
Authors: Marcela Matos; Elina Mattila; Marta M Marques; Jorge Encantado; Cristiana Duarte; Pedro J Teixeira; R James Stubbs; Falko F Sniehotta; Miikka Ermes; Marja Harjumaa; Juha Leppänen; Pasi Välkkynen; Marlene N Silva; Cláudia Ferreira; Sérgio Carvalho; Lara Palmeira; Graham Horgan; Berit Lilienthal Heitmann; Elizabeth H Evans; António L Palmeira Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-12-03 Impact factor: 5.428