↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

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

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
130 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

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

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.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 129 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 17%
Student > Master 21 16%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Student > Postgraduate 7 5%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 29 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 26 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 15%
Social Sciences 15 12%
Psychology 14 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 5%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 36 28%