ORCID Profile
0000-0003-4117-4093
Current Organisation
University of Leeds
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 13-06-2021
Abstract: ObjectivesPhysical distancing, that is keeping 1-2m apart when co-located, can prevent cases of droplet or aerosol transmitted infectious diseases such as SARS-COV2. During the COVID-19 pandemic, distancing was a recommendation or a requirement in many countries. This systematic review aimed to determine which interventions and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) are effective in promoting adherence to distancing and through which potential mechanisms of action (MOAs). MethodsSix databases were searched. The review included studies that were (a) conducted on humans, (b) reported physical distancing interventions, (c) included any comparator (e.g., pre-intervention versus post-intervention randomised controlled trial) and (d) reported actual distancing or predictors of distancing behaviour. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. BCTs and potential MoAs were identified in each intervention. ResultsSix moderate or high quality papers indicated that distancing interventions could successfully change MoAs and behaviour. Successful BCTs (MoAs) included feedback on behaviour (e.g., motivation) information about health consequences, salience of health consequences (e.g., beliefs about consequences), demonstration (e.g., beliefs about capabilities) and restructuring the physical environment (e.g., environmental context and resources). The most promising interventions were proximity buzzers, directional systems and posters with loss-framed messages that demonstrated the behaviours. ConclusionsThe evidence indicates several BCTs and potential MoAs that should be targeted in interventions and highlights the gaps that should be focused on in future research.
Publisher: Routledge
Date: 14-04-2016
Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Date: 12-2013
DOI: 10.1016/J.JURO.2013.06.010
Abstract: The use of anabolic androgenic steroids has not been traditionally discussed in mainstream medicine. With the increased diagnosis of hypogonadism a heterogeneous population of men is now being evaluated. In this larger patient population the existence of anabolic steroid induced hypogonadism, whether transient or permanent, should now be considered. We performed an initial retrospective database analysis of all 6,033 patients who sought treatment for hypogonadism from 2005 to 2010. An anonymous survey was subsequently distributed in 2012 to established patients undergoing testosterone replacement therapy. Profound hypogonadism, defined as testosterone 50 ng/dl or less, was identified in 97 men (1.6%) in the large retrospective cohort initially reviewed. The most common etiology was prior anabolic androgenic steroid exposure, which was identified in 42 men (43%). Because of this surprising data, we performed an anonymous followup survey of our current hypogonadal population of 382 men with a mean±SD age of 49.2±13.0 years. This identified 80 patients (20.9%) with a mean age of 40.4±8.4 years who had prior anabolic androgenic steroid exposure. Hypogonadal men younger than 50 years were greater than 10 times more likely to have prior anabolic androgenic steroid exposure than men older than 50 years (OR 10.16, 95% CI 4.90-21.08). Prior anabolic androgenic steroid use significantly correlated negatively with education level (ρ=-0.160, p=0.002) and number of children (ρ=-0.281, p<0.0001). Prior anabolic androgenic steroid use is common in young men who seek treatment for symptomatic hypogonadism and anabolic steroid induced hypogonadism is the most common etiology of profound hypogonadism. These findings suggest that it is necessary to refocus the approach to evaluation and treatment paradigms in young hypogonadal men.
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 21-12-2022
Abstract: Objectives: Adhering to behavioral recommendations and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is key to control COVID-19 infection rates. However, rates have decreased globally, and potentially modifiable determinants of ongoing adherence and their interaction with social and physical momentary environments are still poorly understood. Here, we comprehensively examine within-person variations and between-person differences in known behavioral determinants (capability, motivation), as well as the moderating role of situationally variable environmental factors (opportunity) in predicting adherence to hygiene and social distancing behaviors. Methods: Ecological momentary assessment study over six months with monthly assessment bouts (four days each, five daily assessments) in 623 German adults. Repeated daily assessments of Capability-Opportunity-Motivation model of behavior (COM-B) factors. Bayesian multilevel logistic regression models were estimated to examine main effects of COM-B factors and moderating effects of momentary environmental factors. Results: Momentary adherence to NPIs was predicted by within-person changes in COM-B factors (motivation: intentions, goal conflict, control beliefs opportunities: regulations, norms). Between-person differences in capabilities (habit strength) and motivation (intentions, control beliefs) predicted adherence across situations. Situation-specific environmental factors moderated the motivation-behavior association (regulation measures increased goal conflict, and non-adherent others decreased the association). Conclusions: In idual momentary (within-person) and stable (between-person) motivation indicators predicted adherence. However, situational environmental factors such as regulations or norms have strong main effects and moderate the motivation-behavior translation. These findings have policy implications, supporting recent claims to not rely on the narrative of “personal responsibility”, but instead combine health education measures to increase in idual motivation with consistent regulation.
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 25-01-2023
Abstract: Background: Behavioural non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as social distancing and hygiene (masking, hand hygiene) were implemented widely during the COVID-19 pandemic to control infections. NPI adherence is crucial for effectiveness, but has also been implied in an increase in mental health problems. However, existing studies often have designs unsuited to understanding mechanistic relationships between NPI adherence, mental health symptoms, and health-related cognitions (risk perceptions, control beliefs). Understanding these mechanisms is crucial for the refinement of existing and the designs of effective future NPIs.Purpose: To separate between- and temporal within-person associations between mental health, risk cognitions and NPI adherence.Methods: Six-month ecological momentary assessment study with six 4-day assessment bouts in 397 German adults. Daily measurement of adherence, mental health symptoms and cognitions during bouts. We used dynamic temporal network analysis to estimate between- person, as well as contemporaneous and temporal within-person effects for distancing and hygiene NPIs.Results: Distinct networks of mental health, health cognitions and adherence emerged. Participants with higher control and higher susceptibility were also more adherent. Similar within-person contemporaneous patterns additionally, distancing and loneliness were associated. Temporally, better adherence to NPIs was associated with better mental health on subsequent days, whereas higher loneliness was associated with better subsequent hygiene adherence.Conclusion: Findings suggest no negative impact of NPI adherence on mental health or vice versa, but instead suggest that adherence might improve mental health symptoms. Control beliefs and risk perceptions are important covariates of adherence - both on between-person and within-person level.
Publisher: American Psychological Association (APA)
Date: 05-2023
DOI: 10.1037/HEA0001236
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 03-04-2023
DOI: 10.1093/ABM/KAAC044
Abstract: Open Science practices include some combination of registering and publishing study protocols (including hypotheses, primary and secondary outcome variables, and analysis plans) and making available preprints of manuscripts, study materials, de-identified data sets, and analytic codes. This statement from the Behavioral Medicine Research Council (BMRC) provides an overview of these methods, including preregistration registered reports preprints and open research. We focus on rationales for engaging in Open Science and how to address shortcomings and possible objections. Additional resources for researchers are provided. Research on Open Science largely supports positive consequences for the reproducibility and reliability of empirical science. There is no solution that will encompass all Open Science needs in health psychology and behavioral medicine’s erse research products and outlets, but the BMRC supports increased use of Open Science practices where possible.
Publisher: Center for Open Science
Date: 22-06-2021
Abstract: Background: Public health emergencies require rapid responses from experts. Differing viewpoints are common in science, however, “mixed messaging” of varied perspectives can undermine credibility of experts, reduce trust in guidance, and act as a barrier to changing public health behaviours. Collation of a unified voice for effective knowledge creation and translation can be challenging. This work aimed to create a method for rapid psychologically-informed expert guidance during the COVID-19 response. Method: TRICE (Template for Rapid Iterative Consensus of Experts) brings structure, peer-review, and consensus to the rapid generation of expert advice. It was developed and trailed with 17 core members of the British Psychological Society COVID-19 Behavioural Science and Disease Prevention Taskforce. Results: Using TRICE, we have produced 15 peer-reviewed COVID-19 guidance documents based on rapid systematic reviews, co-created by experts in behavioural science and public health, taking 4-155 days to produce, with approximately 17 experts and a median of 10 drafts per output. We provide worked-ex les and key considerations, including a shared ethos and theoretical/methodological framework, in this case, the Behaviour Change Wheel and COM-B. Conclusion: TRICE extends existing consensus methodologies and has supported public health collaboration, co-creation of guidance and translation of behavioural science through explicit processes in generating expert advice for public health emergencies.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 30-08-2023
DOI: 10.1093/ABM/KAAD050
Abstract: To control infections, behavioral non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as social distancing and hygiene measures (masking, hand hygiene) were implemented widely during the COVID-19 pandemic. At the same time, adherence to NPIs has also been implied in an increase in mental health problems. However, the designs of many existing studies are often poorly suited to disentangle complex relationships between NPI adherence, mental health symptoms, and health-related cognitions (risk perceptions, control beliefs). To separate between- and temporal within-person associations between mental health, health-related cognitions, and NPI adherence. Six-month ecological momentary assessment (EMA) study with six 4-day assessment bouts in 397 German adults. Daily measurement of adherence, mental health symptoms, and cognitions during bouts. We used dynamic temporal network analysis to estimate between-person, as well as contemporaneous and lagged within-person effects for distancing and hygiene NPIs. Distinct network clusters of mental health, health cognitions, and adherence emerged. Participants with higher control beliefs and higher susceptibility were also more adherent (between-person perspective). Within-person, similar findings emerged, additionally, distancing and loneliness were associated. Lagged findings suggest that better adherence to NPIs was associated with better mental health on subsequent days, whereas higher loneliness was associated with better subsequent hygiene adherence. Findings suggest no negative impact of NPI adherence on mental health or vice versa, but instead suggest that adherence might improve mental health symptoms. Control beliefs and risk perceptions are important covariates of adherence—both on between-person and within-person level.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 19-07-2020
DOI: 10.1111/BJOP.12468
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Daryl O'Connor.