18 and older, any sex, with Pollution; Exposure or Health Behavior. Patients with the condition only — healthy volunteers not accepted.
Results — posted to ClinicalTrials.gov
Per-arm endpoint measurements with 95% confidence intervals where reported. Source: trial results section.
Adoption of Protective Behaviour at 4 WeeksPrimary· Baseline and at 4 weeks
Differences between conditions in actual adoption of protective behaviours at 4 weeks. Outcome measures were collected via self-reports: The question was: 'In the past 4 weeks, how often have you taken action to reduce exposure to air pollution, in response to hearing or reading an air quality forecast?' Measures: from 1 'Not at all' to 9 'all of the time' (answers 'N/A, I am not aware of any forecast' were excluded from analyses).
Group
Value
95% CI
General Public/Usual Health Advice
3.67
± 0.44
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
4.25
± 0.48
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
4.29
± 0.97
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
3.65
± 0.74
Considered Making Permanent ChangesSecondary· at 4 weeks
Differences between conditions in planning the adoption of protective behaviours at 4 weeks. Outcome measures were collected via self-reports: The question was: 'In the past 4 weeks, have you considered making permanent changes to daily travel route or exercise location/time?' possible answers were 'yes' or 'no'. 'unsure' answers were treated as system missing.
Group
Value
95% CI
General Public/Usual Health Advice
10
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
14
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
3
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
7
General Public/Usual Health Advice
23
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
12
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
4
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
5
Actual Behaviour Change in Response to a Real Air Quality AlertSecondary· At 3 weeks
Differences between conditions in self-reported actual behaviour change in response to receiving a real air quality alert. Behavioural outcomes were collected via a questionnaire asking participants to respond 'yes/no' to whether they had changed a series of behaviours in response to receiving the alert. In this case it was a 'moderate' alert
Changed level/length of physical activity outdoors
Group
Value
95% CI
General Public/Usual Health Advice
3
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
2
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
2
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
5
General Public/Usual Health Advice
16
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
23
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
4
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
7
Changed travel route
Group
Value
95% CI
General Public/Usual Health Advice
4
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
2
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
1
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
4
General Public/Usual Health Advice
15
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
23
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
6
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
7
Changed travel time
Group
Value
95% CI
General Public/Usual Health Advice
0
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
3
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
1
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
2
General Public/Usual Health Advice
19
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
22
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
6
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
9
Changed exercise time
Group
Value
95% CI
General Public/Usual Health Advice
2
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
5
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
2
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
1
General Public/Usual Health Advice
16
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
19
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
5
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
11
Changed exercise location
Group
Value
95% CI
General Public/Usual Health Advice
2
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
6
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
2
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
1
General Public/Usual Health Advice
15
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
18
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
5
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
10
Intentions to Adhere to Health Advice Associated With a Hypothetical High Air Pollution ScenarioSecondary· Baseline and at 4 weeks
Differences between conditions in intentions to adhere to the health advice received in association with a hypothetical high air pollution alert scenario. Intentions were measured by a self-report item: participants were asked to agree with a statement about their adherence intentions on 9-point scale, where 1=strongly disagree to 9=strongly agree.
Group
Value
95% CI
General Public/Usual Health Advice
6.69
± 0.23
General Public/Alternative Health Advice
6.26
± 0.33
At Risk Group/Usual Health Advice
7.58
± 0.28
At Risk Group/Alternative Health Advice
6.93
± 0.50
Sponsor's own description
The evidence shows that adherence to air quality advice to adopt protective behaviours during pollution episodes is suboptimal, and that the traditional strategy of simply informing people about high pollution episodes is not effective. The aim of the present study was to investigate how to improve the behavioural impact of existing air quality alert messages through a systematic manipulation of key communication variables, including perceived susceptibility, self-efficacy, response efficacy, planning, message specificity, etc. Users of an existing air quality alert smartphone application in London, who agreed to take part in the study, were randomly allocated to a control group (i.e. receiving usual health advice associated with the official UK Air Quality Index) or an intervention group receiving health advice associated with air quality alerts in an alternative format (i.e. targeting key variables). Both intended and actual adherence behaviours were investigated. Qualitative data were also collected to understand the reasons for not adopting protective behaviours in response to receiving a real air pollution alert.
Implications of this study include the potential to increase protective behaviours in the general population during air pollution episodes through the development of more effective communication strategies provided via existent air quality alert systems.
Publications & conference data
1 peer-reviewed publication reference this trial (live from Europe PMC):
NCT06386055 — Air Pollution and Physical Activity Study
· NA
· recruiting
NCT06529913 — Environmental Exposure to Heavy Metals, Nanoparticles, and Emergent Contaminants and Risk of Allergic Diseases
· NA
· recruiting
NCT04695093 — Children's Health in London and Luton (CHILL)
· active not recruiting
NCT05557487 — Taiwan Real-world LDCT Screening Behavior and Outcome Research for High Risk Subjects Based on Health Promotion Administ
· recruiting
NCT04353232 — Impact of Lifetime Exposure to Air and Noise Pollution on Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality - the AIRCARD Study.
· active not recruiting
Other King's College London trials
Trials by the same sponsor.
NCT07357064 — Professional Decision Making in Childbirth.
· not yet recruiting
NCT07341087 — Skin Inflammation in Perimenopause: A Probiotic Intervention Proof of Concept Trial
· NA
· recruiting
NCT07228962 — Cutaneous Biomarkers in Atopic Eczema Using a Non-Invasive Micro-Suction Device in Babies
· not yet recruiting
NCT07365722 — Comparison of Two Non-surgical Procedure to Manage Gum Disease Around Implants.
· NA
· not yet recruiting
NCT07378488 — Dance/Movement Therapy for Functional Neurological Disorder
· NA
· recruiting
Publications: Europe PMC API search by NCT ID, retrieved 9 June 2026
Drug + disease cross-links: matched in real time against Drug Landscape's normalised drug + company + condition tables
Sponsor: as reported to ClinicalTrials.gov by King's College London
Last refreshed: 22 October 2021
Drug Landscape aggregates and links these public records for informational use only. Always verify against the primary source before clinical or regulatory decisions. Canonical URL: https://druglandscape.com/trial/NCT03552198.