Poor quality diet, physical inactivity, and obesity are prevalent, covariant risk factors for chronic disease, suggesting that behaviour change techniques (BCTs) that effectively change one risk factor might also improve the others. To examine that question, registered meta-review CRD42019128444 synthesised evidence from 30 meta-analyses published between 2007 and 2017 aggregating data from 409,185 participants to evaluate whether inclusion of 14 self-regulatory BCTs in health promotion interventions was associated with greater improvements in outcomes. Study populations and review quality varied, with minimal overlap among summarised studies. AMSTAR-2 ratings averaged 37.31% (SD = 16.21%; range 8.33-75%). All BCTs were examined in at least one meta-analysis; goal setting and self-monitoring were evaluated in 18 and 20 reviews, respectively. No BCT was consistently related to improved outcomes. Although results might indicate that BCTs fail to benefit diet and activity self-regulation, we suggest that a Type 3 error occurred, whereby the meta-analytic research design implemented to analyse effects of multi-component intervention trials designed for a different purpose was mismatched to the question of how BCTs affect health outcomes. An understanding of independent and interactive effects of individual BCTs on different health outcomes and populations is needed urgently to ground a cumulative science of behaviour change.

中文翻译：

---

自我调节行为改变干预措施中的技术，以促进健康饮食、体育活动或减肥：元审查。


饮食质量差、缺乏运动和肥胖是慢性病的普遍协变危险因素，这表明有效改变一种危险因素的行为改变技术 (BCT) 也可能改善其他危险因素。为了研究这个问题，注册荟萃评论 CRD42019128444 综合了 2007 年至 2017 年间发表的 30 项荟萃分析的证据，汇总了 409,185 名参与者的数据，以评估将 14 种自我监管 BCT 纳入健康促进干预措施是否与结果的更大改善相关。研究人群和综述质量各不相同，总结研究之间的重叠极小。 AMSTAR-2 评级平均为 37.31%（SD = 16.21%；范围 8.33-75%）。所有 BCT 均经过至少一项荟萃分析检查；目标设定和自我监控分别在 18 条和 20 条评论中进行了评估。没有 BCT 与改善结果始终相关。尽管结果可能表明 BCT 无法有益于饮食和活动自我调节，但我们认为发生了 3 类错误，即为分析为不同目的而设计的多成分干预试验的效果而实施的荟萃分析研究设计与BCT 如何影响健康结果的问题。迫切需要了解个体 BCT 对不同健康结果和人群的独立和交互影响，为行为改变的累积科学奠定基础。