ArticleBMJ open2026
Understanding preferences for behaviour change support as part of the NHS Health Check: a qualitative study with adults from underserved minoritised ethnic communities.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNHS Health Checks (NHSHCs) provide individuals with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk scores alongside advice and signposting to behaviour change support. A particular problem is that the support people receive is often poorly delivered, absent or not tailored to the needs of people in deprived communities, which risks exacerbating health inequalities. Improving this support is critical if NHSHCs are to achieve their goals of prevention and equity.
objectivesTo explore needs and preferences for behaviour change support among adults in deprived areas, using a digital prototype presenting CVD risk information and signposting to services.
designA longitudinal qualitative study involving focus groups and semi-structured follow-up interviews. PARTICIPANTS AND
settingAdults from minoritised ethnic groups eligible for NHSHCs, recruited online and through a community centre, with both methods targeting high-deprivation areas.
methodParticipants were first shown the digital prototype in focus groups to generate discussion. Follow-up interviews captured more in-depth reflections on needs for behaviour change support. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsWe conducted four focus groups and 20 follow-up interviews with 23 adults, predominantly of South Asian ethnicity living in areas of high deprivation. We developed three themes: (1) Trusted information to counter confusion and misinformation; (2) Support that makes change feel possible and meaningful, through culturally and personally relevant advice that addresses unhelpful beliefs about risk reduction and behaviour change and (3) Ensuring access to inclusive, socially connected environments that feel supportive and conducive to action.
conclusionsFor minoritised ethnic adults in deprived areas, NHSHC support should build on everyday practices and foster positive perceptions of services. Alongside service-level changes, policy action is needed to remove structural barriers (eg, cost, safety) that limit people's ability to act on advice. Such changes could enhance the programme's contribution to reducing inequalities in CVD prevention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.