Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ryan, G. L.
Right arrow Articles by Champion, V. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ryan, G. L.
Right arrow Articles by Champion, V. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Health Education Research, Vol. 16, No. 5, 555-566, October 2001
© 2001 Oxford University Press

Examining the boundaries of tailoring: the utility of tailoring versus targeting mammography interventions for two distinct populations

G. L. Ryan, C. S. Skinner,1, D. Farrell,2 and V. L. Champion,3

Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO 63110,
1 Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710,
2 People Designs, Inc., Durham, NC 27705 and
3 Indiana University School of Nursing, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA

Health messages can be generic, targeted to population subsets or tailored for individual recipients. There has been little examination of which populations need tailored interventions or whether tailored and targeted interventions differ in important ways. We used data from a mammography intervention study in two distinct populations to simulate a comparison of individually tailored versus targeted interventions. Tailored intervention content was based on individual recipients' interview responses. Targeted intervention content was based on composite group responses. For more than 60% in each population group, about two-thirds of tailored message content was a good match with content of the targeted intervention generated by composite group responses; roughly one-third of the content was ‘not a good’ fit for their intervention needs. Tailored interventions for more than 80% of subjects in each population differed in at least some way from those generated for all other population group members. This simulation is a first step in quantifying the contribution of individual tailoring over group targeting. Future research should examine whether a targeted intervention that is mostly a ‘good’ match results in behavioral outcomes similar to those of individually tailored interventions and whether particular differences in tailored versus targeted interventions yield significantly more favorable intervention outcomes.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Health Educ ResHome page
B. Baquero, G. X. Ayala, E. M. Arredondo, N. R. Campbell, D. J. Slymen, L. Gallo, and J. P. Elder
Secretos de la Buena Vida: processes of dietary change via a tailored nutrition communication intervention for Latinas
Health Educ. Res., October 1, 2009; 24(5): 855 - 866.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann Fam MedHome page
B. M. Shelley, A. L. Sussman, R. L. Williams, A. R. Segal, B. F. Crabtree, and on behalf of the Rios Net Clinicians
'They Don't Ask Me So I Don't Tell Them': Patient-Clinician Communication About Traditional, Complementary, and Alternative Medicine
Ann. Fam. Med, March 1, 2009; 7(2): 139 - 147.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Health Promot PractHome page
A. K. Halder, J. A. Tiro, B. Glassman, W. Rakowski, M. E. Fernandez, C. A. Perez, and S. W. Vernon
Lessons Learned From Developing a Tailored Print Intervention: A Guide for Practitioners and Researchers New to Tailoring
Health Promot Pract, July 1, 2008; 9(3): 281 - 288.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J EpidemiolHome page
L. Calvocoressi, M. Stolar, S. V. Kasl, E. B. Claus, and B. A. Jones
Applying Recursive Partitioning to a Prospective Study of Factors Associated with Adherence to Mammography Screening Guidelines
Am. J. Epidemiol., December 15, 2005; 162(12): 1215 - 1224.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.