Learning Objective #1: Contrast tailoring and targeting as intervention strategies to promote health behavior

Learning Objective #2: Consider cost-effectiveness of tailoring and targeting given the findings of this study

---

Introduction Both tailored and targeted computer-based interventions have been shown to be effective in diverse studies, but tailored interventions are more costly and time consuming to develop and implement than are targeted interventions. In a recent study of construction workers' use of hearing protection, no difference was found between groups randomly assigned to receive tailored versus targeted interventions. The targeted intervention was designed to address common concerns of construction workers regarding the use of hearing protection. The tailored intervention addressed concerns specific to each individual.

Goal The goal of this study is to determine if the tailored interventions differed appreciably from the targeted intervention for the sample, and if so, to describe characteristics of individuals for whom the tailored intervention was more effective than the targeted intervention.

Methods Using methodology developed by Ryan and colleagues (1) the similarities between tailored and targeted interventions that were delivered in this study will be quantified, and the content matched. Data on subjects for whom the tailored content was not closely matched to the targeted content will be examined to describe the characteristics of the subjects and their hearing protection outcomes. Comparing these subjects to those whose tailored content matched the targeted content will provide insight into populations that benefit from tailoring versus targeting of interventions.

Implications Evidence is needed to promote optimal use of resources in health promotion practices. It is important to determine when investment of resources into tailoring computer-based interventions is warranted.

1. Ryan GL, Skinner CS, Farrell D, Champion VL. Examining the boundaries of tailoring: the utility of tailoring versus targeting mammography interventions for two distinct populations. Health Educ.Res. 2001 Oct;16(5):555-566.