Back

Application of multi- theory model (MTM) health behavior change: A scoping review

Huai, P.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, B.; Li, Y.; Wu, B.; Lv, H.; Yang, H.

2025-01-29 public and global health
10.1101/2025.01.27.25321021 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundSince its proposal in 2015, MTM has received a lot of attention in health behavior change research both at home and abroad, but the model is still in the exploratory stage. Furthermore, the majority of current health promotion research focuses on a particular health habit, using a rather simple theoretical model. Learning from the evolution of MTM, the study of various behavioral changes is an area of health promotion research that requires careful cultivation. The purpose of this review is to discuss the application of MTM theory in health behavior change. By synthesizing relevant literature, we can improve the understanding of multi-theory model of health behavior change, make up for the shortcomings of existing studies, and provide suggestions for future studies. MethodsWe conducted a scoping review of the literature using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework and followed PRISMA-ScR guidelines to report findings. Databases such as PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Liberary, Web of Science, Ovid, CNKI, Wanfang, Vip and Sinomed. In addition to the traditional scoping review, we also evaluated the quality of the included literature. ResultsMTM is summarized by literature review, and the application status of MTM is reviewed. A total of 68 studies were included in this study, including 50 quantitative investigations, 12 quantitative interventions and 6 qualitative studies. ConclusionThe field of application for MTM is extensive, and it demonstrates a relatively high level of prediction accuracy and intervention effectiveness. Consequently, it can be effectively utilized to advance health behavior promotion and health education initiatives.

Published in Journal of Biology and Health Science · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.