Katherine Bradbury

Dr. Katherine Bradbury


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
30 January 2015 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
LYLucy Yardley
Lucy Yardley
LMLeanne Morrison
Leanne Morrison
KBKatherine Bradbury
Katherine Bradbury
IMIngrid Muller
Ingrid Muller
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

SZSabrina Zeike
Sabrina Zeike
KBKatherine Bradbury
Katherine Bradbury
LLLara Lindert
Lara Lindert
Holger PfaffHolger Pfaff
Holger Pfaff
Due to increasing digitalisation, today’s working world is changing rapidly and provides managers with new challenges. Digital leadership is an important factor in managing these challenges and has become a key concept in the discussion about what kinds of skills managers need for digital transformation. The main research question our study explored was if digital leadership is associated with psychological well-being in upper-level managers. Based on a qualitative pilot study and relevant literature, we developed a new scale for digital leadership in managers. We conducted an online survey with a sample of 368 upper-level managers from a large German ICT-company. Using a stepwise logistic regression analysis, potential effects of digital leadership on psychological well-being (WHO-5) were analysed. Logistic regression analyses showed that better skills in digital leadership were significantly associated with higher well-being. Results also showed that gender, age and managerial experience had no effect in our model. Our study provides a valuable insight into the association between digital leadership and well-being in managers. However, further research is necessary to validate the newly developed scale for digital leadership and to confirm a causal effect in the relationship between digital leadership and well-being.

1 October 2016 in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Paul LittlePaul Little
Paul Little
BSBeth Stuart
Beth Stuart
FHFd Richard Hobbs
Fd Richard Hobbs
JKJo Kelly
Jo Kelly
ESEmily R Smith
Emily R Smith
LYLucy Yardley
Lucy Yardley
The obesity epidemic has major public health consequences. Expert dietetic and behavioural counselling with intensive follow-up is effective, but resource requirements severely restrict widespread implementation in primary care, where most patients are managed. We aimed to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an internet-based behavioural intervention (POWeR+) combined with brief practice nurse support in primary care. We did this pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial at 56 primary care practices in central and south England. Eligible adults aged 18 years or older with a BMI of 30 kg/m(2) or more (or ≥28 kg/m(2) with hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, or diabetes) registered online with POWeR+-a 24 session, web-based, weight management intervention lasting 6 months. After registration, the website automatically randomly assigned patients (1:1:1), via computer-generated random numbers, to receive evidence-based dietetic advice to swap foods for similar, but healthier, choices and increase fruit and vegetable intake, in addition to 6 monthly nurse follow-up (control group); web-based intervention and face-to-face nurse support (POWeR+Face-to-face [POWeR+F]; up to seven nurse contacts over 6 months); or web-based intervention and remote nurse support (POWeR+Remote [POWeR+R]; up to five emails or brief phone calls over 6 months). Participants and investigators were masked to group allocation at the point of randomisation; masking of participants was not possible after randomisation. The primary outcome was weight loss averaged over 12 months. We did a secondary analysis of weight to measure maintenance of 5% weight loss at months 6 and 12. We modelled the cost-effectiveness of each intervention. We did analysis by intention to treat, with multiple imputation for missing data. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN21244703. Between Jan 30, 2013, and March 20, 2014, 818 participants were randomly assigned to the control group (n=279), the POWeR+F group (n=269), or the POWeR+R group (n=270). Weight loss averaged over 12 months was recorded in 666 (81%) participants. The control group lost almost 3 kg over 12 months (crude mean weight: baseline 104·38 kg [SD 21·11; n=279], 6 months 101·91 kg [19·35; n=136], 12 months 101·74 kg [19·57; n=227]). The primary imputed analysis showed that compared with the control group, patients in the POWeR+F group achieved an additional weight reduction of 1·5 kg (95% CI 0·6-2·4; p=0·001) averaged over 12 months, and patients in the POWeR+R group achieved an additional 1·3 kg (0·34-2·2; p=0·007). 21% of patients in the control group had maintained a clinically important 5% weight reduction at month 12, compared with 29% of patients in the POWeR+F group (risk ratio 1·56, 0·96-2·51; p=0·070) and 32% of patients in the POWeR+R group (1·82, 1·31-2·74; p=0·004). The incremental overall cost to the health service per kg weight lost with the POWeR+ interventions versus the control strategy was £18 (95% CI -129 to 195) for POWeR+F and -£25 (-268 to 157) for POWeR+R; the probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of £100 per kg lost was 88% and 98%, respectively. No adverse events were reported. Weight loss can be maintained in some individuals by use of novel written material with occasional brief nurse follow-up. However, more people can maintain clinically important weight reductions with a web-based behavioural program and brief remote follow-up, with no increase in health service costs. Future research should assess the extent to which clinically important weight loss can be maintained beyond 1 year. Health Technology Assessment Programme of the National Institute for Health Research.

23 February 2017 in Implementation Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RBRebecca Band
Rebecca Band
KBKatherine Bradbury
Katherine Bradbury
KMKatherine Morton
Katherine Morton
CMCarl May
Carl May
SMSusan Michie
Susan Michie
LYLucy Yardley
Lucy Yardley
This paper describes the intervention planning process for the Home and Online Management and Evaluation of Blood Pressure (HOME BP), a digital intervention to promote hypertension self-management. It illustrates how a Person-Based Approach can be integrated with theory- and evidence-based approaches. The Person-Based Approach to intervention development emphasises the use of qualitative research to ensure that the intervention is acceptable, persuasive, engaging and easy to implement. Our intervention planning process comprised two parallel, integrated work streams, which combined theory-, evidence- and person-based elements. The first work stream involved collating evidence from a mixed methods feasibility study, a systematic review and a synthesis of qualitative research. This evidence was analysed to identify likely barriers and facilitators to uptake and implementation as well as design features that should be incorporated in the HOME BP intervention. The second work stream used three complementary approaches to theoretical modelling: developing brief guiding principles for intervention design, causal modelling to map behaviour change techniques in the intervention onto the Behaviour Change Wheel and Normalisation Process Theory frameworks, and developing a logic model. The different elements of our integrated approach to intervention planning yielded important, complementary insights into how to design the intervention to maximise acceptability and ease of implementation by both patients and health professionals. From the primary and secondary evidence, we identified key barriers to overcome (such as patient and health professional concerns about side effects of escalating medication) and effective intervention ingredients (such as providing in-person support for making healthy behaviour changes). Our guiding principles highlighted unique design features that could address these issues (such as online reassurance and procedures for managing concerns). Causal modelling ensured that all relevant behavioural determinants had been addressed, and provided a complete description of the intervention. Our logic model linked the hypothesised mechanisms of action of our intervention to existing psychological theory. Our integrated approach to intervention development, combining theory-, evidence- and person-based approaches, increased the clarity, comprehensiveness and confidence of our theoretical modelling and enabled us to ground our intervention in an in-depth understanding of the barriers and facilitators most relevant to this specific intervention and user population.

3 May 2018 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KBKatherine Bradbury
Katherine Bradbury
KMKatherine Morton
Katherine Morton
RBRebecca Band
Rebecca Band
AWAnne Van Woezik
Anne Van Woezik
RGRebecca Grist
Rebecca Grist
LYLucy Yardley
Lucy Yardley
For behaviour-change interventions to be successful they must be acceptable to users and overcome barriers to behaviour change. The Person-Based Approach can help to optimise interventions to maximise acceptability and engagement. This article presents a novel, efficient and systematic method that can be used as part of the Person-Based Approach to rapidly analyse data from development studies to inform intervention modifications. We describe how we used this approach to optimise a digital intervention for patients with hypertension (HOME BP), which aims to implement medication and lifestyle changes to optimise blood pressure control. In study 1, hypertensive patients (N = 12) each participated in three think-aloud interviews, providing feedback on a prototype of HOME BP. In study 2 patients (N = 11) used HOME BP for three weeks and were then interviewed about their experiences. Studies 1 and 2 were used to identify detailed changes to the intervention content and potential barriers to engagement with HOME BP. In study 3 (N = 7) we interviewed hypertensive patients who were not interested in using an intervention like HOME BP to identify potential barriers to uptake, which informed modifications to our recruitment materials. Analysis in all three studies involved detailed tabulation of patient data and comparison to our modification criteria. Studies 1 and 2 indicated that the HOME BP procedures were generally viewed as acceptable and feasible, but also highlighted concerns about monitoring blood pressure correctly at home and making medication changes remotely. Patients in study 3 had additional concerns about the safety and security of the intervention. Modifications improved the acceptability of the intervention and recruitment materials. This paper provides a detailed illustration of how to use the Person-Based Approach to refine a digital intervention for hypertension. The novel, efficient approach to analysis and criteria for deciding when to implement intervention modifications described here may be useful to others developing interventions.

12 April 2018 in Psycho-Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TCTeresa Corbett
Teresa Corbett
TCTara Cheetham
Tara Cheetham
AMAndre Müller
Andre Müller
JSJoanna Slodkowska‐Barabasz
Joanna Slodkowska‐Barabasz
LWLaura J. Wilde
Laura J. Wilde
KBKatherine Bradbury
Katherine Bradbury
Objective: Physical activity (PA) and a healthy diet can improve the well‐being of cancer survivors. However, cancer survivors often do not engage in these behaviours. This study aimed to explore barriers and facilitators to engaging in these behaviours following cancer treatment.Methods: During the development of a Web‐based intervention to enhance health‐related quality of life in cancer survivors, 32 people who had completed treatment for breast, colon, or prostate cancer were presented with an intervention for PA and healthy eating. In‐depth think‐aloud and semi‐structured interviewing techniques were used to elicit perceptions of both behaviours. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.Results: Some individuals reported implementing positive health behaviour changes to maintain health and prevent recurrence, or to help them to move forward after cancer. However, others reported feeling abandoned, and many did not report an intention to engage in lifestyle changes. Individuals discussed contextual and health‐related barriers that were specifically linked to their situation as post‐treatment cancer survivors: individuals described uncertainty about how to implement adaptive changes and perceived a lack of support from health care providers. Others viewed behaviour change as unnecessary or undesirable, with some arguing that non‐modifiable factors contributed more to their cancer diagnosis than lifestyle‐related factors.Conclusions: For many participants in this study, the period that follows treatment for cancer did not represent a “teachable moment.” A variety of complex and heterogeneous factors appeared to impact motivation and may limit cancer survivors from engaging with diet and PA changes.