A quantitative test of the face validity of behavior-change messages based on the Brazilian Dietary Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Implementation science has scant evidence of how dietary guidelines can be developed into actionable behavior-change messages and even less evidence on their motivating potential and perceived effect on behavior. This may explain the widening gap between nutrition science and individual behavior and the low uptake of dietary recommendations by the population for which they are intended. This study aimed to: (i) assess participant receptivity and acceptance of behavior-change messages; (ii) determine if the behavior-change strategies used in the messages and the main theme they relayed influenced participant evaluation of the messages; (iii) explore if evaluations varied by participants' stage of behavior-change; and (iv) elucidate reasons for non-compliance with the messages. METHODS: An online survey was used to test the face validity and participant receptivity of 28 behavior-change messages, among a diverse sample of 2400 adult Brazilians. Participants' understanding of the messages, message likeability and convincingness, and the probability that participants would change behavior in accordance with the message were measured, along with reasons for non-compliance. RESULTS: The mean overall scores suggested that participants liked the messages, understood them, and found them convincing. As expected, the probability of complying with the messages scored lower compared to other study outcomes. Messages about shopping practices, cooking practices, and planning and organization performed better than those on other themes. Participants were more receptive to messages that included behavior-change strategies like goals, social identity, and pleasure, however, the probability of compliance was higher for messages with constructs that emphasized health and cost consequences. Participants trying to change their diet or seeking resources to support healthier dietary choices had greater engagement with and receptivity to the messages. Time and effort, and high costs associated with making healthy changes, were barriers to compliance. CONCLUSIONS: Messages may help improve individual understanding, stimulate interest in a topic and get participants engaged, particularly if messages are goal-oriented and highlight the pleasure and collective identity of these food-related behaviors. However, messages stop short of addressing the structural, social, and economic barriers to healthy diets. These aspects will need to be targeted through legislative action for sustainable behavior change.

Uncited articles in Brazilian public health journals.

Here, we describe the percentage of non-citation in Brazilian public health journals, a field that, until now, had not been investigated nationally or internationally. We analyzed articles, published between 2008 and 2012, of eight public health journals indexed in the scopus database. The percentage of non-citation differs between journals (from 5.7% to 58.1%). We identified four statistically distinct groups: História, Ciência, Saúde - Manguinhos (58% uncited articles); Physis: Revista de Saúde Coletiva, Interface, and Saúde e Sociedade (32% to 37%); Ciência & Saúde Coletiva and Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia (16% to 17%); and Cadernos de Saúde Pública and Revista de Saúde Pública (6%). The non-citation in the first three years post-publication also varies according to journal. Four journals have shown a clear decline of non-citation: Cadernos de Saúde Pública, Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia, and Physis. Another three (Revista de Saúde Pública, Saúde e Sociedade, and Interface) presented an oscillation in non-citation, but the rates of 2008 and 2012 are similar, with different magnitudes. In turn, the journal História, Ciência, Saúde - Manguinhos maintains high rates of non-citation. Multidisciplinary journals attract more citation, but a comprehensive citation model still needs to be formulated and tested.

Uncited articles in Brazilian public health journals / Artigos não citados nas revistas brasileiras em saúde pública

ABSTRACT Here, we describe the percentage of non-citation in Brazilian public health journals, a field that, until now, had not been investigated nationally or internationally. We analyzed articles, published between 2008 and 2012, of eight public health journals indexed in the scopus database. The percentage of non-citation differs between journals (from 5.7% to 58.1%). We identified four statistically distinct groups: História, Ciência, Saúde - Manguinhos (58% uncited articles); Physis: Revista de Saúde Coletiva, Interface, and Saúde e Sociedade (32% to 37%); Ciência & Saúde Coletiva and Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia (16% to 17%); and Cadernos de Saúde Pública and Revista de Saúde Pública (6%). The non-citation in the first three years post-publication also varies according to journal. Four journals have shown a clear decline of non-citation: Cadernos de Saúde Pública, Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia, and Physis. Another three (Revista de Saúde Pública, Saúde e Sociedade, and Interface) presented an oscillation in non-citation, but the rates of 2008 and 2012 are similar, with different magnitudes. In turn, the journal História, Ciência, Saúde - Manguinhos maintains high rates of non-citation. Multidisciplinary journals attract more citation, but a comprehensive citation model still needs to be formulated and tested.

RESUMO Aqui, descrevemos o percentual de não citação em revistas brasileiras de saúde pública, campo até agora não investigado nacional ou internacionalmente. Analisamos artigos, publicados entre 2008 e 2012, de oito revistas de saúde pública indexadas na base Scopus. O percentual de não citação difere entre as revistas (de 5,7% a 58,1%). Identificamos quatro grupos estatisticamente distintos: História, Ciência, Saúde - Manguinhos (58% de artigos não citados); Physis: Revista de Saúde Coletiva, Interface, e Saúde e Sociedade (32% a 37%); Ciência & Saúde Coletiva e Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia (16% a 17%); e Cadernos de Saúde Pública e Revista de Saúde Pública (6%). A não citação nos primeiros três anos pós-publicação também varia segundo revista. Quatro revistas mostraram claro declínio da não citação: Cadernos de Saúde Pública, Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia e Physis. Outras três (Revista de Saúde Pública, Saúde e Sociedade e Interface) apresentaram oscilação na não citação, mas as taxas de 2008 e 2012 são similares, com magnitudes diferentes. Por sua vez, a revista História, Ciência, Saúde - Manguinhos mantém taxas elevadas de não citação. Revistas multidisciplinares atraem mais citação, mas um modelo compreensivo de citações ainda precisa ser formulado e testado.