Behavioural interventions as primary prevention for Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) among young people

The protection of European communication networks has been identified as an important security interest of the Union and its Member States. For further details, you are advised to refer to the introduction of the destination under which this topic falls (as found in the Health Cluster work programme part for 2026-27).

No, this topic is not using the Lump Sum funding model.

For the purpose of this topic, “top NCDs” refers to the most prevalent and highest-burden non-communicable diseases (NCDs - Noncommunicable diseases), as recognised in established international public health monitoring frameworks (e.g. WHO fact sheets, WHO Global NCD Monitoring Framework, Global Burden of Disease assessments).

These frameworks consistently identify cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and chronic respiratory diseases, together with cancers, as the principal NCD groups responsible for the largest share of global morbidity and mortality. However, please note that in line with the call text, cancer is explicitly excluded from the scope of this topic. Nevertheless, other NCDs, such as mental health conditions (World Mental Health Report) can be considered, where justified by epidemiological evidence, relevant to the target population.

Accordingly, applicants must clearly justify the specific NCD(s) targeted, taking into account the specific target group(s) studied, demonstrating alignment with internationally recognised classifications and burden-of-disease evidence.

Please note that the definition of clinical studies, together with additional useful information can be found in the introduction of Health Cluster Work Programme part for 2026-2027.

Additionally, we would like to bring to your attention the fact that the World Health Organization (WHO) has published a “Guidance for best practices for clinical trials”. You are not required not follow this guidance, however we encourage you to do so.

Finally, we would also like to encourage you to consider the latest innovations and advances in the clinical trial design and research methods in order to evaluate promising interventions allowing shorter development timings.

Research work can focus on a subset of the youth population aged 12-25. Naturally, a rationale is always needed to substantiate why the choice has been made.

The topic is for a health prevention-driven RIA and any potential digital tool that is developed, should be used in the implementation of the behavioural interventions for the youth.

Proposals are expected to address behavioural interventions contributing to the primary prevention of the NCDs. Primary prevention refers to interventions aimed at preventing the onset of disease by addressing modifiable risk factors before disease develops. Within this topic, this includes behavioural interventions targeting modifiable risk factors among youth (12–25 years), such as unhealthy diet, physical inactivity, tobacco use and harmful alcohol consumption, among others.

The topic refers to the implementation of already existing evidence-based behavioural interventions. As the topic specifies under the “Scope”, adjusting, deploying, assessing and measuring the success of the intervention(s) can be included in the research work.

Provided this is scientifically justified, it could be possible to include wider age brackets. However, the topic does not foresee supporting a piloting phase for establishing the best scenario based on preliminary data.

Data should be available prior to or be collected at the beginning of the EC-supported research work.

This reference is meant to define what is meant with "top" in the idea of "top NCDs", not to give evidence of the link between NCDs and behaviours. There is a lot of research on this relation. Furthermore, we do not want to influence applicants in the choice of subject; hence, we have not provided any references to specific research on NCDs-behaviour.

We want the intervention to be defined as much as possible. It is normal that certain aspects are left open, but evaluators need to know which intervention they are evaluating; as such, proposals need to have a defined intervention, and a clear idea on how to implement these.

The Health Cluster Work Programme part for 2026-2027 includes a “right to object” condition for nearly all topics, giving the granting authority the right to object to a transfer of ownership or to the exclusive licensing of results, up to 4 years after the end of the action.

For applicants and beneficiaries, little is expected to change, as in previous years this condition had been part of the General Annexes, having legal force across all parts of Horizon Europe (including the Health Cluster topics). In practise, the granting authority may invoke the “right to object” under specific conditions, which so far has happened in very rare occasions over the many years of Horizon Europe.

More details below from Annex 5 of the General Model Grant Agreement:

Where the call conditions in Horizon Europe actions provide for the right to object to transfers or licensing, the granting authority may — up to four years after the end of the action — object to a transfer of ownership or the exclusive licensing of results, if:

the beneficiaries which generated the results have received funding under the grant

it is to a legal entity established in a non-EU country not associated with Horizon Europe, and

the granting authority considers that the transfer or licence is not in line with EU interests.

Beneficiaries that intend to transfer ownership or grant an exclusive licence must formally notify the granting authority before the intended transfer or licensing takes place and:

identify the specific results concerned

describe in detail the new owner or licensee and the planned or potential exploitation of the results, and

include a reasoned assessment of the likely impact of the transfer or licence on EU interests, in particular regarding competitiveness as well as consistency with ethical principles and security considerations.

The granting authority may request additional information.

If the granting authority decides to object to a transfer or exclusive licence, it must formally notify the beneficiary concerned within 60 days of receiving notification (or any additional information it has requested).

No transfer or licensing may take place in the following cases:

pending the granting authority decision, within the period set out above

if the granting authority objects

until the conditions are complied with, if the granting authority objection comes with conditions.

A beneficiary may formally notify a request to waive the right to object regarding intended transfers or grants to a specifically identified third party, if measures safeguarding EU interests are in place. If the granting authority agrees, it will formally notify the beneficiary concerned within 60 days of receiving notification (or any additional information requested).