Evidence mapPaperPMID 41758616Full record

SynthesisHealth education research2026

Evaluating public health campaigns on health promotion, substance use prevention and physical activity: a systematic review.

Thomas Zandonai, Giulia Scarpa, Vittoria Barbati, Alessandro Carollo, Andrea Bizzego, Gianluca Esposito, Ornella Corazza

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health education research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Thomas ZandonaiAddiction Science Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento, Corso Bettini, 84, 38068 Rovereto, Trento, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7606-9675
Giulia ScarpaAddiction Science Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento, Corso Bettini, 84, 38068 Rovereto, Trento, Italy.ORCID 0009-0003-7359-2422
Vittoria BarbatiAddiction Science Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento, Corso Bettini, 84, 38068 Rovereto, Trento, Italy.ORCID 0009-0001-3418-8027
Alessandro CarolloAddiction Science Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento, Corso Bettini, 84, 38068 Rovereto, Trento, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2737-0218
Andrea BizzegoAddiction Science Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento, Corso Bettini, 84, 38068 Rovereto, Trento, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1586-8350
Gianluca EspositoAddiction Science Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento, Corso Bettini, 84, 38068 Rovereto, Trento, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9442-0254
Ornella CorazzaAddiction Science Lab, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento, Corso Bettini, 84, 38068 Rovereto, Trento, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7371-319X

Funding

Italian Ministry of HealthSurveillance and Control of Doping and for the Protection of Health in Sports Activities of the Technical Health Committee 2023-6; 0047620
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public health campaigns on substance use and physical activity aid disease prevention. This review examines how process evaluations are conducted in substance use and physical activity campaigns, focusing on methodologies, theoretical frameworks, implementation quality, fidelity, reach, and delivery. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, and Google Scholar from 1990 up to April 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, and observational designs involving adult human participants and reporting process or implementation evaluation components. Twenty-one studies met inclusion criteria. A one-step forward citation analysis was performed using the bibliometrix package in R. Findings revealed that 62% of studies reported process evaluation components, with 52% employing mixed-method approaches. Commonly cited theoretical frameworks included the Transtheoretical Model, Theory of Planned Behaviour, and Social Cognitive Theory. Only 20% of studies explicitly defined process evaluation objectives, and few translated findings into actionable implementation adaptations. Bibliometric analysis indicated influence across 373 publications, primarily from the United States, Australia, and Canada. Overall, process evaluation in public health campaigns remain inconsistent. To enhance the quality and utility of such evaluations, greater theoretical integration, improved methodological transparency, and the use of standardized assessment tools are recommended.

Indexed as

ExerciseHealth PromotionPublic HealthSubstance-Related DisordersHumansProgram Evaluation

Identifiers

PMID41758616
PMCPMC13017709

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.