Preventive health is a core function of health systems for reducing disease burden and meeting health promotion goals. Australia’s National Preventive Health Strategy (NPHS) identifies seven priority focus areas: tobacco and nicotine, healthy diet, physical activity, cancer screening, immunisation, alcohol and other drugs, and mental health. The readiness of community members to address behaviours associated with these areas had not been comprehensively examined. This study used community focus groups to capture lived experience and perspectives relevant to implementing the NPHS through behaviour change.
Researchers conducted six focus groups with a total of 27 adults drawn from the Australian general population. An applied descriptive framework guided thematic identification and analysis of transcripts to extract key themes and sub-themes related to motivations, barriers, support mechanisms and information use for preventive health behaviours. The Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Technology Sydney approved the study (approval number ETH24-9111). The authors declared no competing interests. Data will be made available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.
Participants described processes they use to decide whether and how to adopt preventive behaviours. Across accounts, themes of prioritisation and risk–benefit assessment were prominent: individuals weighed competing demands and considered potential benefits against perceived costs or harms. Participants also described strategies of critical appraisal of health information when determining which recommendations to follow and how to apply general guidance to their personal circumstances. Sociocultural influences—such as family norms, community expectations and cultural practices—were reported to shape what people considered important and feasible when making health choices.
Accounts emphasised that information alone was often insufficient to produce sustained behavioural change. Participants identified the importance of support systems, including social networks, community resources and health services, to facilitate adopting and maintaining preventive behaviours. Support-seeking was a repeated sub-theme: people reported turning to trusted sources or peers for help interpreting guidance and for practical assistance. Barriers that impeded change were described alongside facilitators, indicating that enabling environments and accessible supports are central to translating motivation into action.
Participants recounted how they share and receive preventive health information within their social circles. This theme captured motivations for communicating health advice to others, strategies for passing on information, and concerns about credibility and relevance when relaying messages. The processes of personalising information and adapting it for friends, family or community members were noted as part of how preventive health messaging is propagated beyond formal channels.
When describing their preventive health behaviours and information use, participants engaged most strongly with healthy eating and physical activity. These areas generated the most discussion and appeared to be priorities for many participants. By contrast, cancer screening was discussed less often in the focus groups. The seven NPHS focus areas—tobacco and nicotine, healthy diet, physical activity, cancer screening, immunisation, alcohol and other drugs, and mental health—provided the framework for exploring relative engagement, but detailed comparisons of each area beyond the relative emphasis reported were not provided in the source.
The findings suggest high community engagement with preventive health topics paired with challenges in navigating and adapting available information to individual needs. These insights indicate opportunities for policymakers, healthcare providers and other stakeholders to more effectively enact the NPHS by delivering targeted preventive health information and care. Tailoring messaging to account for prioritisation processes, supporting critical appraisal skills, strengthening support systems, and addressing sociocultural determinants may improve the translation of motivation and information into sustained behaviour change.
The study received ethical approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Technology Sydney (approval number ETH24-9111). The authors declared no competing interests. Funding for the work was declared from the Australian Research Council (FT220100610). The source indicates that data will be made available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.
Focus group participants described a range of motivations, barriers and support needs relevant to implementing the National Preventive Health Strategy through individual behaviour change. Key thematic areas—making informed choices, the role of support systems in facilitating change, and how preventive information is shared—highlight where targeted interventions and tailored information could support uptake of NPHS priorities. The strongest community engagement was reported for healthy eating and physical activity, while cancer screening received less discussion. These community perspectives can inform policymakers and clinicians aiming to translate strategy priorities into effective preventive health practice.