Skip to main content

Table 1 Theoretical justification of our approach: description of factors, aims, methods and approaches used in Runfitcheck

From: Stimulating injury-preventive behaviour in sports: the systematic development of two interventions

Factor Aim Method Description method Approach in Runfitcheck
Knowledge To know which injury-preventive behaviours are available. Knowledge transfer (Schaalma et al., 2001) [34] Providing of and/or transfer of knowledge on the desired behaviour. In the advice provided in the intervention, information on injury-preventive behaviour is transferred to runners.
Advance organizers (Kools et al., 2006) [35] Presenting an overview of the material that enables a learner to activate relevant schemas so that new material can be associated. The advice on injury-preventive behaviour is presented in an accessible way with clear headings. Furthermore, runners can receive a personal schedule for running sessions and strength exercises each week (by email). The schedules are accompanied by instructions on how to carry out the strength exercises or running session.
Chunking (Smith, 2008) [36] Using stimulus patters that may be made up of parts but that one perceives as a whole. The name of the intervention for runners is Runfitcheck, which refers to the necessity for the runners to prepare themselves for a running session and to verify their physical fitness prior to the running session. The name of the intervention reminds the runners that it is important to pay attention to their physical fitness when they go for a run.
Awareness To be aware that the execution of injury-preventive behaviour is important to prevent RRIs. Consciousness raising (Prochaska et al., 2008) [37] Providing information, feedback or confrontation about the causes, consequences and alternatives for a problem or a problem behaviour. The intervention informs the runners about their risk for RRIs. For example, it is stated that novice runners do have a higher risk than more experienced runners
Also, runners gain insight into the amount of stress or force they can put on their body, and goal-setting behaviour.
Knowledge transfer (Schaalma et al., 2001) [34] Providing of and/or transfer of knowledge on the desired behaviour. The transfer of information on injury-preventive behaviour increases the runners’ awareness of that injury-preventive behaviour.
Self-Efficacy To feel able to execute injury-preventive behaviour. Guided practice (McAlister et al., 2008) [38] Prompting individuals to rehearse and repeat the behaviour various times, discuss the experience, and provide feedback. In the intervention, runners are stimulated to execute injury-preventive behaviour by clear instruction in the advices, and instruction videos guided by voice over These instruction videos are also available in the personal schedules for running sessions and strength exercises which runners can receive each week (by email).
Modelling (Bandura,1997 [39]; McAlister et al., 2008 [37]; Rogers, 2003) [40] Providing an appropriate model to reinforce the desired action. In the intervention, several ordinary athletes execute the desired injury-preventive behaviours. These athletes give a good example, e.g. they perform warm-up routines or strength exercises.
Tailoring (Lustria et al., 2009) [41] Matching the intervention or components to previously measured characteristics of the participants. In the intervention, the advice given is based on a runner’s physical fitness (the amount of stress or force the runner can impose on his body) and goal-setting behaviour, which are assessed at the start of the intervention.