Skip to main content
Download PDF

Effect of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model on health programs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Systematic Reviews volume 11, Article number: 213 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

The predisposing, reinforcing, and enabling constructs in educational diagnosis and evaluation policy, regulatory, and organizational constructs in educational and environmental development (PRECEDE-PROCEED) model has been used as a theoretical framework to guide health promotion strategies to prevent chronic diseases and improve the quality of life. However, there is a lack of evidence as to whether applying the PRECEDE-PROCEED model effectively improves health outcomes. This study aimed to systematically review intervention studies that applied the PRECEDE-PROCEED model and examine its effectiveness. 

Methods

In December 2020, seven databases were systematically searched. The quality of studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The outcome of interest for the meta-analysis was knowledge.

Results

In total, 26 studies were systematically reviewed. Most studies provided educational programs as the main intervention for various population groups. Symptom or disease management and health-related behavior promotion were the most common topics, and education was the most frequently used intervention method. The PRECEDE-PROCEED model was applied in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of the intervention programs. Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis, which showed that interventions using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model significantly improved knowledge.

Conclusions

This study indicated that individuals are more likely to engage in health-related behaviors with better knowledge. Thus, the PRECEDE-PROCEED model can be used as the theoretical framework for health promotion interventions across population groups, and these interventions are particularly effective with regard to knowledge improvement.

Peer Review reports

Background

The prevalence of chronic diseases is expected to increase continuously worldwide, and this phenomenon is closely related to lifestyle habits such as smoking, drinking, physical inactivity, and unhealthy eating habits [1]. Proper health promotion plans and strategies are necessary to prevent chronic diseases and improve quality of life throughout life [2]. Health promotion strategies should be employed by individuals, organizations, and communities as health goals can be accomplished through mutual efforts between participants and healthcare professionals [1]. When healthcare professionals implement health promotion programs, they are able to identify the health risk or enrichment factors of participants. Theory-based health promotion programs are important to evaluate whether these factors are appropriate [3].

The Predisposing, Reinforcing, and Enabling Constructs in Educational Diagnosis and Evaluation-Policy, Regulatory, and Organizational Constructs in Educational and Environmental Development (PRECEDE-PROCEED) model is a useful theoretical framework for planning, conducting, and evaluating health promotion programs [4]. It has been used to promote health programs for more than 30 years [3]. Green [5] developed the PRECEDE section for health diagnosis and education needs and later added the PROCEED section to the framework by adding elements of policy, regulation, organization, and the environment to emphasize the effects of ecological aspects in the modified model [4]. The model consists of eight phases: social assessment, epidemiological assessment, educational/ecological assessment, administrative/policy assessment and intervention planning, implementation, process evaluation, impact evaluation, and performance evaluation. It is a multistep approach for the development and implementation of a health promotion program [4].

A considerable number of studies have used the PRECEDE-PROCEED model primarily in the planning, implementation, and evaluation stages of various health promotion programs across populations and settings [6,7,8,9]. A study on prevention education for high-risk diabetic patients reported that eating habits effectively promoted preventive behaviors [7]. According to a previous study that assessed school safety education programs for elementary school students, the safety program impacted safety knowledge and performance ability [6]. In addition, health-related quality of life was found to improve with the quality of life education program using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model for women-headed households [8]. However, whether the PRECEDE-PROCEED model was effective across the studies remains unknown. Although the use of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model has been recommended, several studies have used only the PRECEDE section of the model as their theoretical framework [10,11,12,13,14]. Therefore, this study aimed to systemically analyze previous studies that used the PRECEDE-PROCEED model. A meta-analysis was also performed to examine the effectiveness and usefulness of health promotion intervention across different settings and populations.

Methods

This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Protocols [15]. This protocol has been registered on INPLASY (registration number: INPLASY202250017; https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-5-0017).

Eligibility criteria

The eligibility criteria for the studies were as follows: (a) studies containing participants of all ages, healthy people, and people with diseases in the community and hospital settings; (b) intervention studies (i.e., randomized controlled trial, quasi-experimental study) that used the PRECEDE-PROCEED model, excluding those that used only the PRECEDE model and observational studies; and (c) studies containing health-related outcomes, with behavior, cognitive and physiological health, and quality of life as primary outcomes, as well as other predisposing factors for effective intervention based on the PRECEDE-PROCEED model.

Search strategy

Seven electronic databases were used to search for relevant studies. The databases used to search for the published articles were PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, and Scopus; the databases used to search for the gray literature were ProQuest, Regional Information Sharing Systems (RISS), and OpenGrey. To include studies using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model as a theoretical framework, the following search term combinations were used: [Precede-Proceed AND Model] OR [Precede-Proceed Model OR Precede Proceed] OR [Precede-Proceed AND health promotion] OR [Precede-Proceed AND community health planning] OR [Precede-Proceed AND population-based planning] OR [Precede-Proceed AND health program] OR [Precede-Proceed AND program evaluation] OR [Precede-Proceed AND intervention]. The language was limited to English, and the publication date was not restricted. The final search was conducted in December 2020.

Data extraction

We reviewed all the titles and abstracts of the retrieved studies and removed duplicates. Two reviewers (JK and BK) determined the inclusion criteria and reviewed the full text of the selected articles. If their decision was unanimous, a third reviewer (KL) confirmed the inclusion criteria. Three independent reviewers (JK, BK, and KL) used a custom form developed to extract the appropriate data. The following data were extracted: study country, study design, participants, number and mean age of the intervention and control groups, duration and frequency of intervention, outcomes, and application of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model.

Study quality assessment

Quality assessment was performed independently by two reviewers (JK and BK) using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), which systematizes the critical evaluation of non-randomized and randomized quantitative studies [16]. Disagreement was resolved by independent assessment by a third reviewer (KL). The overall quality scores of this tool are a combination of quality criteria designed to assess the appropriateness of sampling, measurement, rates of data completion, and the number of factors aimed to determine the potential for bias. Two screening questions were utilized to determine whether there was a clear research question and if the collected data addressed the research questions. Subsequently, non-randomized and randomized quantitative studies were evaluated using five questions with “Yes,” “No,” and “Can’t tell” answers. After evaluation according to each criterion, the number of “yes” responses was rated.

Data synthesis and analysis

We summarized the publication year, country, setting, study design, participants’ characteristics, intervention, duration of session, outcome, and application of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model.

For the meta-analysis of the primary outcome (i.e., knowledge) among the outcome values, we entered the data into the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) version 3.3 program based on each study design and outcome measurement (number of participants, mean, standard deviation, and p value). The outcomes of the study were addressed using the standardized mean difference (SMD) to report the standardized mean difference of the continuous outcome type data and 95% confidence interval (CI), as well as the p values of the SMDs. We used a random effects model to reduce the effect of statistical heterogeneity on the evaluation and reported the I2 statistic.

Results

Study selection

The initial searches identified 1,838 records from seven electronic databases; after removing duplicates, 1,451 studies remained. Furthermore, from the review of titles and abstracts, 1,235 studies were excluded because of the study design (mixed-method studies, qualitative studies, and review papers) and because they applied the PRECEDE model only. Following the examination of the full text of articles, observational studies (n = 190) were excluded, and experimental studies or quasi-experimental studies (n = 26) were included. Of these, 15 studies were not combined in the meta-analysis; hence, only 11 studies were included in the meta-analysis (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow diagram of the study selection

Full size image

Study characteristics

The study characteristics are presented in Table 1. All included studies were published after 2000: 7 studies (26.9%) between 2003 and 2010, 6 studies (23.1%) between 2011 and 2015, and 13 studies (50.0%) after 2015. Approximately half of all studies were published within the last 5 years. Among the 26 studies, nine were conducted in Iran (34.6%), six in the USA (23.1%), two in Canada (7.7%), and two in Thailand (7.7%). The remaining seven studies (26.9%) were conducted in different countries (China, Indonesia, Peru, Spain, Taiwan, Tanzania, and Turkey). Study settings included were hospitals (n = 12) and communities (n = 14) such as schools or universities (n = 6), health centers (n = 4), community pharmacies, military installations, districts, and vocational program sites. Regarding the study design, 12 studies (46.2%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 14 studies (53.8%) had a quasi-experimental research design.

Table 1 Characteristics of the included studies (n = 26)
Full size table

Participants were patients (n = 11) with community-acquired pneumonia, diabetes mellitus (DM), beta-thalassemia, hypertension, tuberculosis, inflammatory arthritis, and coronary artery disease, parents of asthmatic children (n = 1), students (n = 6), healthcare providers (n = 3) such as nurses and midwives, and other community-dwelling participants (n = 5) such as military spouses, older adults, menopausal women, pig farmers, and low-income young adults. The mean age of participants was 42.7 (range, 18.3-68.0) years.

In terms of intervention, twenty-five of the 26 studies in the systematic review provided educational programs as the main intervention, except for one study that used group activity for behavioral modification. The intervention topics included the following: symptom or disease management (e.g., menopause, diabetes, hypertension, and asthma [n = 10]), health behavior promotion (e.g., diet, physical activity, sleep [n = 10]), psychological health (for example suicide and stress [n = 3]), improvement in quality of life (n = 2), and dental examination techniques (n = 1). Various teaching methods such as lectures (n = 5), one-on-one education (n = 4), group education (n = 11), online education (n = 3), and distribution of materials (n = 13) were used. Most studies (n = 20) used more than two teaching methods. Additionally, most of the intervention providers were healthcare professionals such as doctors, nurses, or health educators. The duration of the intervention per session ranged from 20 to 240 min, and the intervention frequency ranged from 1 to 21. Twenty-one studies (80.8%) included control groups, 11 studies (42.3%) provided usual care such as education, with training programs originally offered. The total sample sizes of the intervention and control groups varied, ranging from 32 to 1,639.

For outcome, we reviewed knowledge as a primary outcome and secondary outcomes (e.g., health-related behaviors, cognitive outcome, quality of life, and physiological outcome). Eleven of the 26 studies in the systematic review reported the knowledge as a primary outcome of the intervention. The review showed studies that measured health-related behaviors (n = 11), cognitive outcomes (n = 5), quality of life (n = 4), physiological outcomes (n = 3), and others (n = 3). Eleven articles reported that an intervention using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model effectively improved health-related behaviors [7, 17, 19, 20, 25, 26, 29, 30, 32, 38, 42]. Five studies showed that intervention was useful for cognitive outcomes (awareness, attitude, competency, self-efficacy, and self-acceptance) [21,22,23, 33, 34, 36]. Four studies reported increased quality of life as a primary intervention outcome for patients with DM, migrant tuberculosis, coronary artery bypass grafts, and older adults [18, 31, 35, 41]. Three studies focused on physiological outcomes after interventions such as systolic blood pressure reduction [24], decreased hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels [28], and reduction of musculoskeletal symptoms [39]. The remaining studies found a reduction in stress [27], reduced incidence of pork infected with cysticercosis [37], and improved family empowerment [40].

Additionally, the application of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model was divided into three categories: (1) planning, including the program design; (2) implementation; and (3) evaluation. In 16 studies (61.5%), the PRECEDE-PROCEED model was used for all three categories (planning, implementation, and evaluation). Eight studies (30.8%) applied it only for planning, while the others applied it for planning and implementation (n = 2, 7.7%).

Quality of included studies

We evaluated the methodological quality of all the included studies using the MMAT (Table 2). Of the 26 studies, 7 (26.9%) met all five criteria, and 12 (46.2%) met three or four of the five criteria. Additionally, 7 studies (26.9%) met one or two of the five criteria.

Table 2 Quality assessment
Full size table

Effect of intervention

The most common intervention utilizing the theoretical framework of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model was “educational programs.” The educational assessment of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model is classified into predisposing, reinforcing, and enabling factors that affect behavior and environmental changes [4]. Predisposing factors (knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, personal preferences, existing skills, and self-efficacy beliefs) are the basis and motivating precedent for behaviors affecting health and quality of life [3]. In this study, the primary outcome measure, knowledge was included in the meta-analysis. Of the 26 studies, only 11 studies presenting statistical values of educational programs on knowledge were entered into the CMA program. However, the secondary outcome measures were too diverse, so other studies not presented statistical values of the effect of the education program had excluded.

Random effects models were developed, and I2 statistics were used to examine the heterogeneity. The analysis of effect sizes was conducted on seven randomized controlled trials and four quasi-experimental studies, dividing subgroups in accordance with the study design (Fig. 2). For seven randomized controlled trials, the effect size was 3.64 (95% CI 1.95 to 5.33), which was statistically significant (p < 0.001). However, the mean effect size was statistically heterogeneous (Q = 5.00, p < 0.001, I2 = 98%). The effect size of four quasi-experimental studies was 1.68 (95% CI 0.75 to 2.61), which was also statistically significant (p < 0.001) and heterogeneous (Q = 0.85, p < 0.001, I2 = 95%). These results indicate that the intervention using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model had statistically significant effects on knowledge changes in both randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Knowledge (predisposing factors)

Full size image

This study used a funnel plot to visualize publication bias and asymmetry. The shape of the funnel plot was asymmetric, indicating the presence of publication bias (Fig. 3). Accordingly, trim-and-fill analyses were used to adjust for publication bias. As a result, two possible missing studies were included on the left side of the distribution (Fig. 4). The adjusted mean effect size was calculated as 1.73, which was reduced from the observed effect size of 2.58. However, even after adjusting for publication bias, the mean effect size was still statistically significant (95% CI = 0.63, 2.83). Therefore, it could be interpreted that publication bias did not affect the overall findings of this study and that the PRECEDE-PROCEED model had significant effects on changes in knowledge.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Funnel plot (observed values)

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

Adjusted funnel plot

Full size image

Discussion

The PRECEDE-PROCEED model is mainly used to guide health promotion strategies in different population groups, with the advantage of applying theoretical frameworks, interventions, and evaluations [4]. In our systematic review, we summarized the characteristics of studies that used the PRECEDE-PROCEED model on health programs. Among the 26 studies, 50% were published from 2015 to 2020, and 34.6% (n = 9) were conducted in Iran. This might be related to an increased interest in modifying health behaviors and healthy lifestyles in Iran [18, 20]. In particular, the importance of health education for behavioral changes towards healthy lifestyles is increasing in Iran; health education is being implemented by applying the PRECEDE-PROCEED model for health programs in different population target groups [8, 43], and its effectiveness has been proven in several studies [8, 43]. Additionally, the study participants in these previous studies varied widely, including patients with health problems and community-dwelling healthy people such as students, medical staff, and the general public comprising adolescents and older adults. Therefore, this theory provides education across all ages for a population group. With respect to the application of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model, most studies applied the model for planning, implementation, and evaluations. However, 38.5% (n = 10) of the studies partially applied the model to program planning and implementation. This theory could be utilized as a roadmap that provides a structure for systematically planning and evaluating health behavior change programs and presents specific directions for changing behavioral programs [3]. Therefore, a series of processes are systematically applied to a health program through a theoretical framework.

Most studies used education as an intervention method. The PRECEDE-PROCEED model allows for evidence-based best practices in health promotion intervention [4]. The model uses an appropriate educational approach because it conducts population-centered interventions and provides practical guidelines for health programs [4, 44]. Two or more methods have been used for most educational interventions, with group education and distribution of materials being the most common. Group education, including group activity and discussion, is useful in sharing experiences, encouraging others [25], and increasing interactions among people [26]. The group education method would, in theory, be an effective way to improve mutual understanding through discussion. The distribution of materials is an appropriate educational method to pass knowledge to the entire population simultaneously [37]. Through leaflets, booklets, and posters, it is possible to deliver the general overview or the main contents of a message to the target audience, and because it is summarized in pictures rather than texts, even those who cannot read the text can understand it. Thus, leaflets, booklets, and posters are useful reference materials [37].

In the analyzed studies, the main intervention was symptom or disease management and promoting healthy behavior such as diet management and active physical activity. Interventions utilized predisposing, reinforcing, and enabling factors based on educational and ecological assessment, one of the model’s components. Symptoms or disease management intervention mainly utilized predisposing and reinforcing factors. Predisposing factors were knowledge, complications, and management methods about a specific disease; in contrast, reinforcing factors were customized management through experts [19] or family and friend support about disease management [31]. These interventions changed behaviors by improving understanding of the disease and self-management ability [33]. Interventions about promoting healthy behaviors utilized various methods such as educational messages and short message services (SMS), distribution of compact discs (CDs), posting materials [27], and distribution of emails with videos and web portals [30]. This not only changed participants’ behaviors [27] but also allowed them to enjoy the program by setting goals [30]. It is helpful to use the appropriate methods by mobilizing various resources to promote healthy behaviors. In addition, the secondary outcomes of this study were mostly health-related behaviors. This might mainly be because behavioral changes as outcome variables were evaluated based on health-related interventions and educational programs that applied the model. Therefore, considering the characteristics of this model, it is appropriate to use health-related behaviors as an outcome variable.

Although a systematic review was published in 2020, a meta-analysis has not yet been performed. A recent systematic review of 26 studies utilizing the PRECEDE-PROCEED model as a screening tool reported that this model could provide a framework that enhances understanding and knowledge [45]. In addition to a systematic literature review, this study performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model. Our meta-analysis results showed that intervention programs applying the PRECEDE-PROCEED model effectively improved the knowledge of predisposing factors in educational and ecological assessment. Predisposing factors are antecedents that motivate a particular behavior [3, 45]. This suggests that people with high health knowledge may be more likely to engage in health-related behaviors.

This study has some limitations. First, we only included studies published in English. Second, since studies applying the PRECEDE-PROCEED model were significantly diverse regarding their study design and outcome measures and data are not available for most of the specified outcome measures, it is difficult to calculate the effect sizes. We tried to overcome this limitation by including knowledge as the primary outcome using meta-analysis. However, since only knowledge among the proposing factors was included in the meta-analysis, there are limitations regarding how the effects should be interpreted. Despite these limitations, our study has several strengths. The PRECEDE-PROCEED model could be a useful theoretical model for designing health programs. Overall, this study provided an objective assessment of the effects of interventions that applied the PRECEDE-PROCEED model on knowledge enhancement.

Conclusions

Our systematic literature review and meta-analysis showed that interventions using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model mainly used education methods and measured health-related behaviors. This model is a useful tool across populations among all age groups. Specifically, knowledge was effectively improved when the intervention was conducted using this model. In the future, it will be useful to use the PRECEDE-PROCEED model when implementing programs for disease management and health promotion. 

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

PRECEDE-PROCEED:

Predisposing, Reinforcing, and Enabling Constructs in Educational Diagnosis and Evaluation-Policy, Regulatory, and Organizational Constructs in Educational and Environmental Development

PRISMA:

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses statement

CINAHL:

Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature

RISS:

Regional Information Sharing Systems

MMAT:

Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool

CMA:

Comprehensive Meta-Analysis

DM:

Diabetes Mellitus

HbA1c:

Hemoglobin A1c

SMS:

Short Message Service

CD:

Compact Disc

References

  1. Bauer UE, Briss PA, Goodman RA, Bowman BA. Prevention of chronic disease in the 21st century: elimination of the leading preventable causes of premature death and disability in the USA. Lancet. 2014;384:45–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Edelman CL, Mandle CL, Kudzma EC. Health promotion throughout the life span-e-book. 8th ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gielen AC, McDonald EM, Gary TL, Bone LR. Using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model to apply health behavior theories. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, editors. Health behavior and health education: theory, research, and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2008. p. 407–29.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Green LW, Kreuter MW. Health program planning: an educational and ecological approach. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Green LW. Toward cost–benefit evaluations of health education: some concepts, methods, and examples. Health Educ Monogr. 1974;2:34–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Kim CN, Lee EY. The effects of a school safety education program based on the PRECEDE-PROCEED model in upper grade elementary students. J Korean Acad Commun Health Nurs. 2010;21:419–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Moshki M, Dehnoalian A, Alami A. Effect of PRECEDE-PROCEED model on preventive behaviors for type 2 diabetes mellitus in high-risk individuals. Clin Nurs Res. 2017;26:241–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Solhi M, Hamedan MS, Salehi M. A PRECEDE-PROCEED based educational intervention in quality of life of women-headed households in Iran. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2016;30:417–25.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Zendeh TH. The effect of a program designed based on PRECEDE-PROCEED model on adolescents’ mental health and their parents’ participation. Evid Based Care. 2012;2:45–54.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Aboumatar H, Ristaino P, Davis RO, Thompson CB, Maragakis L, Cosgrove S, et al. Infection prevention promotion program based on the PRECEDE model: improving hand hygiene behaviors among healthcare personnel. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2012;33:144–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Alteneder RR, Price JH, Telljohann SK, Didion J, Locher A. Using the PRECEDE model to determine junior high school students’ knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about AIDS. J Sch Health. 1992;62:464–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Borhani M, Rastgarimehr B, Shafieyan Z, Mansourian M, Hoseini SM, Arzaghi SM, et al. Effects of predisposing, reinforcing and enabling factors on self-care behaviors of the patients with diabetes mellitus in the Minoodasht city. Iran J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2015;14:27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hazavehei SMM, Jalili Z, Heydarnia AR, Faghihzadeh S. Application of the PRECEDE model for controlling iron-deficiency anemia among children aged 1–5, Kerman. Iran Promot Educ. 2006;13:173–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Polcyn MM, Price JH, Jurs SG, Roberts SM. Utility of the PRECEDE model in differentiating users and nonusers of smokeless tobacco. J Sch Health. 1991;61:166–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Hong QN, Pluye P, Fàbregues S, Bartlett G, Boardman F, Cargo M, et al. In: Mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT), version 2018. Registration of Copyright (#1148552). Canadian Intellectual Property Office: Industry Canada; 2018. p. 1-10. http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/146002140/MMAT_2018_criteria-manual_2018-08-08c.pdf.

  17. Adamuz J, Viasus D, Simonetti A, Jiménez-Martínez E, Molero L, González-Samartino M, et al. Impact of an educational program to reduce healthcare resources in community-acquired pneumonia: the EDUCAP randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0140202.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Azar FE, Solhi M, Darabi F, Rohban A, Abolfathi M, Nejhaddadgar N. Effect of educational intervention based on PRECEDE-PROCEED model combined with self-management theory on self-care behaviors in type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2018;12:1075–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Barasheh N, Shakerinejad G, Nouhjah S, Haghighizadeh MH. The effect of educational program based on the precede-proceed model on improving self-care behaviors in a semi-urban population with type 2 diabetes referred to health centers of Bavi. Iran Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2017;11:S759–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bazpour M, Gheibizadeh M, Malehi AS, Keikhaei B. The effect of a training program based on the PRECEDE-PROCEED model on lifestyle of adolescents with Beta-Thalassemia: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Res. 2019;13:12–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Bridges LS, Sharma M, Lee JHS, Bennett R, Buxbaum SG, Reese-Smith J. Using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model for an online peer-to-peer suicide prevention and awareness for depression (SPAD) intervention among African American college students: experimental study. Health Promot Perspect. 2018;8:15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cannick GF, Horowitz AM, Garr DR, Reed SG, Neville BW, Day TA, et al. Oral cancer prevention and early detection: using the PRECEDE-PROCEED framework to guide the training of health professional students. J Cancer Educ. 2007;22:250–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cannick GF. Development, implementation, and evaluation of a standardized patient-based training program in oral cancer prevention and early detection for dental students. PhD thesis. Medical University of South Carolina; 2006.

  24. Chabot I, Moisan J, Grégoire JP, Milot A. Pharmacist intervention program for control of hypertension. Ann Pharmacother. 2003;37:1186–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Chiang LC, Huang JL, Yeh KW, Lu CM. Effects of a self-management asthma educational program in Taiwan based on PRECEDE-PROCEED model for parents with asthmatic children. J Asthma. 2004;41:205–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cole RE, Horacek T. Effectiveness of the “my body knows when” intuitive-eating pilot program. Am J Health Behav. 2010;34:286–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Didehvar M, Zareban I, Jalili Z, Bakhshani NM, Shahrakipoor M, Balouchi A. The effect of stress management training through PRECEDE-PROCEED model on occupational stress among nurses and midwives at Iran hospital Iranshahr. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10:LC01-5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Gary TL, Bone LR, Hill MN, Levine DM, McGuire M, Saudek C, et al. Randomized controlled trial of the effects of nurse case manager and community health worker interventions on risk factors for diabetes-related complications in urban African Americans. Prev Med. 2003;37:23–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kaewchin P, Banchonhattakit P, Chamroen P. The effects of an integration of PRECEDE-PROCEED model and health literacy in behavioral modification for weight control among overweight and obesity of adolescents in the Northeast of Thailand. Indian J Public Health. 2019;10:945–51.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kattelmann KK, Bredbenner CB, White AA, Greene GW, Hoerr SL, Kidd T, et al. The effects of young adults eating and active for health (YEAH): a theory-based web-delivered intervention. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014;46:S27-41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Khortwong P, Kaewkungwal J. Thai health education program for improving TB migrant’s compliance. J Med Assoc Thai. 2013;96:365–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim HY, Nam EW, Jin KN, So AY. Effectiveness of a school-based mental health education program in an impoverished urban area of Peru. Glob Health Promot. 2020;27:77–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lacaille D, White MA, Rogers PA, Backman CL, Gignac MA, Esdaile JM. A proof-of-concept study of the “employment and arthritis: making it work” program. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59:1647–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lin H, Wang X, Luo X, Qin Z. A management program for preventing occupational bloodborne infectious exposure among operating room nurses: an application of the PRECEDEPROCEED model. J Int Med Res. 2020;48:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mazloomymahmoodabad S, Masoudy G, Fallahzadeh H, Jalili Z. Education based on PRECEDE-PROCEED on quality of life in elderly. Glob J Health Sci. 2014;6:178–84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Moshki M, Mohammadzadeh F, Dehnoalian A. The effectiveness of a group-based educational program on the self-efficacy and self-acceptance of menopausal women: a randomized controlled trial. J Women Aging. 2018;30:310–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ngowi HA, Mlangwa JE, Mlozi MR, Tolma EL, Kassuku AA, Carabin H, et al. Implementation and evaluation of a health-promotion strategy for control of Taenia solium infections in Northern Tanzania. Int J Health Promot Educ. 2009;47:24–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ranjbaran S, Dehdari T, Sadeghniiat-Haghighi K, Majdabadi MM. Poor sleep quality in patients after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: an intervention study using the PRECEDE-PROCEED model. J Tehran Heart Cent. 2015;10:1–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Sezgin D, Esin MN. Effects of a PRECEDE-PROCEED model based ergonomic risk management programme to reduce musculoskeletal symptoms of ICU nurses. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2018;47:89–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Syakurah RA, Adzani SY, Saltike AD, Ramadhini DS. Family outreach and empowerment program: health promotion model for medical students. J Educ Health Promot. 2018;7:63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Pournaghash-Tehrani S, Etemadi S, editors. ED and quality of life in CABG patients: an intervention study using PRECEDE-PROCEED educational program. Int J Impot Res. 2014;26:16–9.

  42. Walsh J, Kattelmann K, White A. Stage-based healthy lifestyles program for non-college young adults. Health Educ. 2017;117:148–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Rezapour B, Mostafavi F, Khalkhali HR. School-based and PRECEDE-PROCEED-model intervention to promote physical activity in the high school students: case study of Iran. Glob J Health Sci. 2016;8:54497.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Porter CM. Revisiting PRECEDE-PROCEED: a leading model for ecological and ethical health promotion. Health Educ J. 2016;75:753–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Saulle R, Sinopoli A, De Paula Baer ADP, Mannocci A, Marino M, De Belvis AG, et al. The PRECEDE–PROCEED model as a tool in public health screening: a systematic review. Clin Ter. 2020;171:e167–77.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

This work was supported by the 2017 Faculty-Student Research Fund from the College of Nursing, Yonsei University (6–2017-0115).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nursing, Yonsei University Wonju College of Nursing, Wonju, 26426, South Korea

    Junghee Kim

  2. Yonsei University College of Nursing, Seoul, 03722, South Korea

    Jaeun Jang

  3. College of Nursing and Brain Korea 21 FOUR Project, Yonsei University, Seoul, 03722, South Korea

    Bora Kim

  4. Yonsei University College of Nursing and Mo-Im Kim Nursing Research Institute, 50-1 Yonsei-Ro, Seodaemun-Gu, Seoul, 03722, South Korea

    Kyung Hee Lee

Authors
  1. Junghee Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jaeun Jang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bora Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kyung Hee Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

JK, KL, and JJ contributed to the study conception and design. All authors performed the literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment. JK prepared the first draft. The authors were responsible for the revisions and approval of the submission of the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kyung Hee Lee.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 3

Table 3 Search strategy
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, J., Jang, J., Kim, B. et al. Effect of the PRECEDE-PROCEED model on health programs: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev 11, 213 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-02092-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-02092-2

Keywords

Systematic Reviews

ISSN: 2046-4053