IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0004362.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effectiveness of interventions used to improve general health check uptake by the older adult population: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Wing Yan Lau
  • Jinxiao Lian
  • Maurice Yap

Abstract

Undergoing general health check enable early detection of common diseases and giving individuals a sense of control over their wellbeing. However, the general health check uptakes are typically unsatisfactory. Various interventions have been introduced to improve general health check uptakes. This review aims to answer how well these interventions work. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in four electronic databases in August 2020 and updated between 2021 and 2024. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that met the inclusion criteria were selected. Meta-analysis was performed on qualified RCTs to estimate the overall effectiveness of the interventions. The components of intervention were characterised using the Behaviour Change Technique Taxonomy. A total of 3360 records were screened. Eight RCTs were finally included. Among these RCTs, nine types of interventions were identified with all implemented in the invitation stage, including enhanced invitation letters, telephone invitations, question-behaviour-effect (QBE) questionnaires, financial incentives, leaflets, pre-notification short message service (SMS), SMS reminders, reminder letters and point-of-care automated prompts to clinical staff. All these interventions showed a significant improvement in the general health check uptakes than the control groups, except leaflets and QBE questionnaires. A total of fifteen behaviour change techniques were used in these interventions. A meta-analysis showed the pooled effect of these interventions was significantly associated with the improvement in the general health check uptakes than the control (OR =1.30, 95% CI =1.15 – 1.46). However, the high heterogeneity observed (84%) could reduce the reliability of the pooled summary effect. This review found that interventions primarily implemented during the invitation process are effective in improving the general health check uptake rates. Future research should aim to extend these interventions beyond the invitation stage to address internal and external barriers that deter older adults from seeking general health checks. The systematic review protocol is registered on PROSPERO (ref: CRD42021221041).

Suggested Citation

  • Wing Yan Lau & Jinxiao Lian & Maurice Yap, 2025. "The effectiveness of interventions used to improve general health check uptake by the older adult population: a systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(3), pages 1-19, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0004362
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0004362
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0004362
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0004362&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0004362?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0004362. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.