Time to Form a Habit: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Health Behaviour Habit Formation and Its Determinants.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Healthcare Pub Date : 2024-12-09 DOI:10.3390/healthcare12232488
Ben Singh, Andrew Murphy, Carol Maher, Ashleigh E Smith
{"title":"Time to Form a Habit: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Health Behaviour Habit Formation and Its Determinants.","authors":"Ben Singh, Andrew Murphy, Carol Maher, Ashleigh E Smith","doi":"10.3390/healthcare12232488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Healthy lifestyles depend on forming crucial habits through the process of habit formation, emphasising the need to establish positive habits and break negative ones for lasting behaviour changes. This systematic review aims to explore the time required for developing health-related habits. <b>Methods:</b> Six databases (Scopus, PsychINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline and PubMed) were searched to identify experimental intervention studies assessing self-report habit or automaticity questionnaires (e.g., the self-report habit index (SRHI) or the self-report behavioural automaticity index (SRBAI)), or the duration to reach automaticity in health-related behaviours. Habit formation determinants were also evaluated. Meta-analysis was performed to assess the change in the SRHI or SRBAI habit scores between pre- and post-intervention, and the study quality was assessed using the PEDro scale. <b>Results:</b> A total of 20 studies involving 2601 participants (mean age range: 21.5-73.5 years) were included. Most studies had a high risk of bias rating (n = 11). Health behaviours included physical activity (n = 8), drinking water (n = 2), vitamin consumption (n = 1), flossing (n = 3), healthy diet (n = 8), microwaving a dishcloth (for foodborne disease reduction, n = 2) and sedentary behaviour reduction (n = 1). Four studies reported the median or mean times to reach habit formation, ranging from 59-66 days (median) and 106-154 days (means), with substantial individual variability (4-335 days). The meta-analysis showed significant improvements in habit scores pre- to post-intervention across different habits (standardised mean difference: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49-0.88). Frequency, timing, type of habit, individual choice, affective judgements, behavioural regulation and preparatory habits significantly influence habit strength, with morning practices and self-selected habits generally exhibiting greater strength. <b>Conclusions:</b> Emerging evidence on health-related habit formation indicates that while habits can start forming within about two months, the time required varies significantly across individuals. A limitation of this meta-analysis is the relatively small number of studies included, with flossing and diet having the most evidence among the behaviours examined. Despite this, improvements in habit strength post-intervention are evident across various behaviours, suggesting that targeted interventions can be effective. Future research should aim to expand the evidence base with well-designed studies to better understand and enhance the process of establishing beneficial health habits.</p>","PeriodicalId":12977,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare","volume":"12 23","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11641623/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12232488","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Healthy lifestyles depend on forming crucial habits through the process of habit formation, emphasising the need to establish positive habits and break negative ones for lasting behaviour changes. This systematic review aims to explore the time required for developing health-related habits. Methods: Six databases (Scopus, PsychINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline and PubMed) were searched to identify experimental intervention studies assessing self-report habit or automaticity questionnaires (e.g., the self-report habit index (SRHI) or the self-report behavioural automaticity index (SRBAI)), or the duration to reach automaticity in health-related behaviours. Habit formation determinants were also evaluated. Meta-analysis was performed to assess the change in the SRHI or SRBAI habit scores between pre- and post-intervention, and the study quality was assessed using the PEDro scale. Results: A total of 20 studies involving 2601 participants (mean age range: 21.5-73.5 years) were included. Most studies had a high risk of bias rating (n = 11). Health behaviours included physical activity (n = 8), drinking water (n = 2), vitamin consumption (n = 1), flossing (n = 3), healthy diet (n = 8), microwaving a dishcloth (for foodborne disease reduction, n = 2) and sedentary behaviour reduction (n = 1). Four studies reported the median or mean times to reach habit formation, ranging from 59-66 days (median) and 106-154 days (means), with substantial individual variability (4-335 days). The meta-analysis showed significant improvements in habit scores pre- to post-intervention across different habits (standardised mean difference: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49-0.88). Frequency, timing, type of habit, individual choice, affective judgements, behavioural regulation and preparatory habits significantly influence habit strength, with morning practices and self-selected habits generally exhibiting greater strength. Conclusions: Emerging evidence on health-related habit formation indicates that while habits can start forming within about two months, the time required varies significantly across individuals. A limitation of this meta-analysis is the relatively small number of studies included, with flossing and diet having the most evidence among the behaviours examined. Despite this, improvements in habit strength post-intervention are evident across various behaviours, suggesting that targeted interventions can be effective. Future research should aim to expand the evidence base with well-designed studies to better understand and enhance the process of establishing beneficial health habits.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
养成习惯的时间:关于健康行为习惯养成及其决定因素的系统回顾和元分析》(A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Health Behaviour Habit Formation and Its Determinants)。
背景:健康的生活方式取决于通过习惯形成过程形成重要的习惯,强调需要建立积极的习惯,并打破消极的习惯,以实现持久的行为改变。本系统综述旨在探讨养成与健康相关的习惯所需的时间。方法:检索6个数据库(Scopus、PsychINFO、CINAHL、EMBASE、Medline和PubMed),以确定评估自我报告习惯或自动性问卷(如自我报告习惯指数(SRHI)或自我报告行为自动性指数(SRBAI))或健康相关行为达到自动性持续时间的实验干预研究。习惯形成的决定因素也进行了评估。采用meta分析评估干预前后SRHI或SRBAI习惯评分的变化,并采用PEDro量表评估研究质量。结果:共纳入20项研究,涉及2601名受试者(平均年龄21.5-73.5岁)。大多数研究有高偏倚风险评级(n = 11)。健康行为包括体力活动(n = 8)、饮水(n = 2)、维生素摄入(n = 1)、使用牙线(n = 3)、健康饮食(n = 8)、微波洗碗布(用于减少食源性疾病,n = 2)和减少久坐行为(n = 1)。四项研究报告了达到习惯形成的中位数或平均时间,范围从59-66天(中位数)到106-154天(平均值),具有很大的个体差异(4-335天)。荟萃分析显示,干预前后不同习惯的习惯评分有显著改善(标准化平均差:0.69,95% CI: 0.49-0.88)。频率、时间、习惯类型、个人选择、情感判断、行为调节和准备习惯显著影响习惯强度,早晨练习和自我选择习惯通常表现出更大的强度。结论:与健康相关的习惯形成的新证据表明,虽然习惯可以在大约两个月内开始形成,但所需的时间因人而异。本荟萃分析的一个局限性是纳入的研究数量相对较少,在检查的行为中,使用牙线和饮食的证据最多。尽管如此,干预后习惯强度的改善在各种行为中都很明显,这表明有针对性的干预是有效的。未来的研究应旨在通过精心设计的研究来扩大证据基础,以更好地理解和加强建立有益健康习惯的过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Healthcare
Healthcare Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
0
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: Healthcare (ISSN 2227-9032) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal (free for readers), which publishes original theoretical and empirical work in the interdisciplinary area of all aspects of medicine and health care research. Healthcare publishes Original Research Articles, Reviews, Case Reports, Research Notes and Short Communications. We encourage researchers to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. For theoretical papers, full details of proofs must be provided so that the results can be checked; for experimental papers, full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Additionally, electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculations, experimental procedure, etc., can be deposited along with the publication as “Supplementary Material”.
期刊最新文献
Feasibility and Pre-Post Changes Associated with a 12-Week Treadmill Walking Training Programme on Walking Performance, Physical Function, Fatigue, and Quality of Life in People with Multiple Sclerosis: A Single-Arm Pilot Study. Effectiveness of a Dyadic Pain Management Program for Community-Dwelling Older Adults with Chronic Pain: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial. Mapping the Landscape of Medical AI Research in Korea Using Topic Modeling. Predictability of Deep Bite Correction and Curve of Spee Flattening in Clear Aligner Therapy: An Open-Label and One Arm Retrospective Study. Reproductive Health Challenges Among Adolescents in Eastern Europe: Evidence from a Romanian Tertiary Hospital.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1