↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Theoretical domains framework to assess barriers to change for planning health care quality interventions: a systematic literature review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Theoretical domains framework to assess barriers to change for planning health care quality interventions: a systematic literature review
Published in
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, July 2016
DOI 10.2147/jmdh.s107796
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Paul Collet, Hamideh Sarmast, Niranjan Kissoon, Mirkaber Mosavianpour

Abstract

Theoretical domains framework (TDF) provides an integrative model for assessing barriers to behavioral changes in order to suggest interventions for improvement in behavior and ultimately outcomes. However, there are other tools that are used to assess barriers. The objective of this study is to determine the degree of concordance between domains and constructs identified in two versions of the TDF including original (2005) and refined version (2012) and independent studies of other tools. We searched six databases for articles that studied barriers to health-related behavior changes of health care professionals or the general public. We reviewed quantitative papers published in English which included their questionnaires in the article. A table including the TDF domains of both original and refined versions and related constructs was developed to serve as a reference to describe the barriers assessed in the independent studies; descriptive statistics were used to express the results. Out of 552 papers retrieved, 50 were eligible to review. The barrier domains explored in these articles belonged to two to eleven domains of the refined TDF. Eighteen articles (36%) used constructs outside of the refined version. The spectrum of barrier constructs of the original TDF was broader and could meet the domains studied in 48 studies (96%). Barriers in domains of "environmental context and resources", "beliefs about consequences", and "social influences" were the most frequently explored in 42 (84%), 37 (74%), and 33 (66%) of the 50 articles, respectively. Both refined and original TDFs cataloged barriers measured by the other studies that did not use TDF as their framework. However, the original version of TDF explored a broader spectrum of barriers than the refined version. From this perspective, the original version of the TDF seems to be a more comprehensive tool for assessing barriers in practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 32%
Student > Master 11 22%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Professor 3 6%
Other 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 20%
Social Sciences 10 20%
Psychology 6 12%
Unspecified 4 8%
Other 8 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 July 2016.
All research outputs
#4,277,816
of 8,088,508 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#129
of 225 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,835
of 258,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,088,508 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 258,114 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.