Interventions are increasingly being co-produced in partnership with people from the communities who will use them. This can help to ensure interventions are appropriate for and valued by these communities. This article describes how our research team has implemented the methods and tools of the widely used Person-Based Approach to integrate co-production into the heart of our intervention development. We describe a series of case studies and consider how traditional engagement approaches may be complemented with approaches that better suit the needs and preferences of those from underserved communities. We consider the benefits and limitations of each co-production approach and propose a range of tools (e.g. table of changes, planning table, guiding principles) to support co-production. We conclude by highlighting that collaborating with intervention users requires flexibility in engagement efforts to facilitate meaningful partnerships at all stages of intervention development. We also advocate working with community partners to agree on an approach that supports both research requirements and reflects their needs and preferences.
Promoting behaviour change among healthcare providers (HCPs) is crucial for addressing evidence-to-practice gaps in clinical settings. The field of implementation science offers systematic, theory-informed approaches to promote the timely adoption, integration, and sustainment of evidence-based interventions to improve patient care. In this ‘starter kit’, we provide a summary of core concepts from implementation science and highlight its complementarity with health psychology. We then introduce a range of commonly used theories, models, and frameworks that help specify HCP behaviour, identify determinants of HCP behaviour in complex clinical settings, and develop interventions to support implementation efforts. Finally, we offer practical guidance for health psychology scholars on how to apply these concepts and methods to support the development, evaluation, and implementation of interventions targeting practice change among HCPs. We believe that fostering opportunities for mutual learning and collaboration across disciplines is vital to ensure that HCPs and other key interest holders, such as policymakers and health system leaders, are supported in delivering high-quality, evidence-based care.
This editorial introduces the second part of the special issue dedicated to intervention development. While the first part featured invited contributions presenting each of the six steps of the Intervention Mapping framework alongside two complementary contributions, this second part brings together articles submitted in response to an open call. The articles address several complementary aspects of intervention development, including community partnerships in intervention design, testing mechanisms of action through Proof-of-Principle trials, rapid approaches to usability testing, and strategies from implementation science to support practice change in healthcare settings. By highlighting these perspectives, the special issue expands the discussion beyond Intervention Mapping and emphasises the iterative processes required to translate theory and evidence into effective and sustainable interventions. We hope that this collection provides practical insights and inspiration for researchers and practitioners working to design, test, and implement health psychology interventions.
Qualitative research methods have historically been undervalued in psychology and health sciences, overshadowed by the dominance of behaviorism and a positivist research tradition that prioritized quantitative approaches. Qualitative methods were often dismissed as overly interpretive and subjective, perceived as incompatible with positivist principles. However, recent years have seen a resurgence in the use of qualitative methods, with growing recognition of their unique contributions, particularly as complementary to quantitative approaches. Despite this progress, concerns remain, including the resource-intensive nature of qualitative research and the perceived lack of generalizability of findings. Furthermore, many health scholars receive limited training in these methods, hindering their broader adoption and effective use. We argue for the indispensable integration of qualitative methods in the design, implementation, and evaluation of health interventions and advocate for improved training for health promoters and other professionals. Qualitative research can offer critical insights into why and how interventions succeed, capturing essential stakeholder perspectives that can inform adaptation and enhance effectiveness of interventions. Using the example of Intervention Mapping, we outline a guide to selecting appropriate qualitative methods for various contexts, target populations, and phases of intervention planning, implementation, and evaluation. We also provide an outlook on how the challenges of qualitative methods can be addressed.
Evaluation takes place in Intervention Mapping Step 6. Various evaluation questions, outcomes, measures and designs can be used to guide the evaluation process. Although the use of gold standards, such as a randomized controlled trail is recommended, these may not align with interventions in real-life settings. This paper describes the complexity of evaluating public health interventions in real-world contexts. Three case studies highlight the challenges of evaluation when: (i) interventions need to be developed and implemented quickly; (ii) changes to the intervention content or its implementation are desirable; and (iii) interventions are already publicly available and accessible. Our aim was to advance the field by sharing experiences and critically reflecting on how to embrace complexity.
Intervention development, evaluation, and implementation are central to health psychology, yet much of the accumulated knowledge remains behind closed sources. This special issue makes expertise on Intervention Mapping openly accessible as an educational resource for scholars, citizens, and students. The first part of the issue covers each of the six steps of Intervention Mapping through case studies and practical guidance, complemented by two additional contributions that broaden perspectives on its use and application. Together, the articles provide both foundational insights and reflective lessons, aiming to inspire a wider and more diverse community of Intervention Mapping users.
This contribution focuses on the first step of Intervention Mapping (IM), which provides the foundation for later stages by analysing health needs and assets. Step 1 involves four tasks: (1) establishing a diverse, inclusive planning group to involve key stakeholders in programme development, implementation, and evaluation; (2) conducting a needs assessment to comprehensively analyse health and well-being using an ecological perspective; (3) performing an asset assessment to understand the priority population, community, and environment where the programme will be implemented; and (4) translating these findings into clear programme goals. We then illustrate IM Step 1 through a case study.
The Intervention Mapping (IM) framework has been widely used to develop behavior change interventions. This paper outlines Step 3 of IM, program design, which focuses on three core tasks: generating program ideas, selecting behavior change methods, and translating these methods into practical applications that meet parameters for effectiveness. In addition, Acyclic Behavior Change Diagrams (ABCDs) are introduced as a tool to support program design and adaptation, illustrated with real-world examples. By providing a practical guide to applying Step 3, we aim to support scholars in developing new behavior change interventions or strengthening existing ones.
Promoting the implementation of evidence-based interventions is crucial to achieving impact. This requires strategies that address important determinants at each stage of the implementation process, including adoption, implementation, continuation, scaling up, and de-implementation. One important implementation strategy is creating interventions that can be adapted to unique contexts. This article describes the lessons learned from action-oriented research on the implementation strategies and outcomes of the Good Affordable Food programme. Our conclusion is that the implementation process requires a systematic approach at every stage, commitment from the programme team, close contact with local implementers, and monitoring of local implementation and adaptation processes.
Step 4 of the Intervention Mapping (IM) protocol, known as Program Production, emphasizes translating a carefully planned program into a practical, effective, real-world intervention. A program's success can be compromised by deviations from its core principles, poor contextual adaptation, or ineffective implementation planning. We outline key considerations for intervention planners for step 4 of the IM protocol, including early engagement with participants and implementers to ensure relevant and respectful interventions. Recommendations include refining program structure, creating and pre-testing draft materials, leveraging existing resources, and enlisting expert design support. Interventions should remain aligned with theoretical principles, feasible within available resources, and culturally grounded to reflect the values, beliefs, and lived experiences of the target population.
A big part of intervention development is testing before implementation. Bridging the gap between observational findings gained from interviews, focus groups, and correlational studies, theoretical science-focused evidence from experiments, and the gold-standard in intervention testing in large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remains a challenge in behaviour change intervention development. This article introduces Proof-of-Principle RCTs (PoP-RCTs) as an intermediate step in bridging this gap. PoP-RCT are designed to test whether the intervention changes specific targeted mechanisms of action (MoAs), thus having the potential to change the behaviours targeted, before instigating larger trials. By focusing on the MoAs, PoP-RCTs offer a critical step that ensures theoretical assumptions are validated using experimental methodology, improving the overall rigor of intervention development. Practical case studies are included to illustrate real-world application of PoP-RCTs in health psychology. Highlighting their role in refining interventions before full-scale RCT testing, in work on recovery of activity after stroke. Following interview studies, evidence was obtained that greater perceived control predicted better and faster recovery. These studies were followed by experimental testing of interventions to enhance perceived control, in studies we now term PoP-RCTs. Having demonstrated that the interventions could change perceived control, a full trial found that they were effective in increasing activity. Taken together, we think PoP-RCTs are already an implicit part of intervention development. Proposing this as an explicitly labelled step between experiments and RCTs, could improve effectiveness/efficacy and increase intervention success.
Core Processes are a helpful and systematic way to address questions that need to be answered to find evidence-based solutions in a problem-driven context. A valuable planning framework, such as Intervention Mapping, poses the right questions.
Usability testing is a critical component of intervention development but is often perceived as time-consuming. To address this challenge, efficient and time-saving methods are essential. In the Opening Up project, we developed a decision aid to support individuals in deciding whether to discuss their mental health issues in an academic setting. After the initial development phase, we applied rapid analysis to process usability testing findings and reduce the time needed to identify and address usability issues. This approach provided quick insights into usability problems and strengths while maintaining the quality of findings. In this article, we describe the rapid analysis method, provide a quick guide for applying it in intervention development, and reflect on its utility.
Intervention Mapping is the most comprehensive approach to systematic behavior change (O'Cathain et al., 2019). For this reason, applying Intervention Mapping can been daunting. In this paper, I discuss the mistakes I made when applying the various iterative steps of Intervention Mapping in the design, implementation, and evaluation of an intervention aiming to reduce HIV stigma in health care settings in the Netherlands.
Psychedelic treatments show promise for improving health and well-being. This article summarizes the history of early psychedelic research and its recent renaissance. Although much of this research focuses on mental health and substance abuse, observational studies have linked psychedelic use to outcomes such as healthier diet, lower rates of heart disease, and even spontaneous, positive changes in health-related outcomes. The importance of understanding mechanisms that underlie psychedelic impacts - i.e., why positive changes occur - was emphasized (“Behavioral Psychedelics”), as was the need for attention to the social context of psychedelic experiences. Evidence for differential impacts of psychedelic use with v. without a partner, and impacts of psychedelic use on close relationships, was presented.
In September 2024, the EHPS conference took place in Cascais, Portugal. This report captures the experiences of early career researchers who were awarded grants to attend. We reflect on how the conference expanded our understanding of health psychology, enhanced our confidence in networking, provided opportunities to present our research, and inspired ideas for future projects and collaborations. The conference also allowed us to engage with the latest developments in health psychology from around the world, highlighting the value of international perspectives and building connections across borders. Our experiences demonstrate not only how attending the conference supported our professional growth, but also how the EHPS fosters an inclusive and accessible environment for early career researchers.
The 2024 EHPS roundtable on personalized digital health interventions brought together experts and participants for lively discussions and shared insights. Drawing on survey results and these conversations, this article explores the key challenges in advancing personalization, such as limited theoretical guidance, technical and data complexities relating to the dynamic adaptation of intervention delivery, and keeping users engaged over time. Participants emphasized the urgent need for focused research to better understand long-term engagement, use data science more effectively, and strengthen theoretical foundations. They also highlighted that strong interdisciplinary collaboration and ongoing user involvement are crucial to unlocking the true potential of personalized digital health interventions.
New season, new system! As we roll into summer and head toward EHPS 2025 in Groningen, the EHP editorial team has been navigating the wild frontier of innovation — testing out a brand-new publication process. It’s been a journey full of plot twists, minor disasters, valuable lessons, and healthy doses of perseverance. We apologise in advance for anything that feels a little less polished — we’re learning as we go and aiming to improve with each issue. In this editorial, we share the highlights of this edition, celebrate the incredible work of our community, and offer a glimpse of what’s coming next. Consider it your slightly chaotic but well-meaning pre-conference companion. Wish us luck — and enjoy the read!
This article summarises the 2024 SYNERGY Expert Meeting held at the European Health Psychology Society conference, which brought together health and environmental psychologists to advance the emerging field of environmental health psychology. The meeting aimed to foster collaboration, integrate theories and methods, and develop joint interventions addressing climate change. Discussions highlighted shared principles, complementary approaches, and the urgent need for interdisciplinary action. Five key recommendations were proposed to sustain momentum: co-authoring papers, attending environmental psychology conferences, hosting online meetings, applying for joint grants, and guest lecturing. This unified approach promises impactful research and interventions that promote sustainable behaviours and improve health outcomes.
In 2024 the CREATE workshop and EHPS conference brought the five of us to sunny Cascais in Portugal. Receiving CREATE and Conference grants gave us, as early-career researchers, the opportunity to participate in the CREATE pre-conference workshop “Empowering Collaboration: Patient and Public Involvement in Health Research”, led by Dr. Anna Levke Brütt and Dr. Elspeth Mathie. Their powerful insights sparked new ideas on integrating patient voices into research and was just the start of the informative and motivating conference programme. Throughout the conference we made new friends, connected with future collaborators, and gained fresh perspectives to fuel our work. It was an unforgettable experience that boosted our careers and deepened our passion for health psychology.
