TY - JOUR
T1 - Status of theory use in self-care research
AU - Jaarsma, Tiny
AU - Westland, Heleen
AU - Vellone, Ercole
AU - Freedland, Kenneth E.
AU - Schröder, Carin
AU - Trappenburg, Jaap C.A.
AU - Strömberg, Anna
AU - Riegel, Barbara
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding: This research was supported by Australian Catholic University. Barbara Riegel is funded by the National Institutes of Health/National Institute for Nursing Research (NINR) R01NR018196. Anna Stromberg is funded by the Swedish National Science Council/Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare (VR-FORTE), Ercole Vellone is funded by the Center of Excellence for Nursing Scholarship. The APC was funded by Linköping University.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/12/2
Y1 - 2020/12/2
N2 - Background: Theories can provide a foundation to explain behavior, investigate relationships, and to predict the effect of interventions. The aim of the study was to clarify the use of theories in studies testing interventions to promote self-care. Method: A scoping review. PubMed, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and CINAHL were searched from January 2008 through January 2019. Nine common chronic conditions were included. We included studies testing a self-care intervention if they used a randomized controlled trial design. The study was registered in PROSPERO (#123719). Results: The search retrieved 9309 potential studies, of which 233 were included in the review. In total, 76 (33%) of the 233 studies used a theory and 24 different theories were used. Bandura’s social cognitive theory was the most frequently used (48 studies), but 22 other theories were used in a minority of studies. Most studies used theories minimally to justify or provide a rationale for the study, to develop the intervention, to select outcomes, and/or to explain the results. Only eight studies fully used a theory in the rationale, intervention development, choice of outcomes, and discussion. Conclusion: The use of theories to guide self-care research is limited, which may pose a barrier in accumulating knowledge underlying self-care interventions.
AB - Background: Theories can provide a foundation to explain behavior, investigate relationships, and to predict the effect of interventions. The aim of the study was to clarify the use of theories in studies testing interventions to promote self-care. Method: A scoping review. PubMed, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and CINAHL were searched from January 2008 through January 2019. Nine common chronic conditions were included. We included studies testing a self-care intervention if they used a randomized controlled trial design. The study was registered in PROSPERO (#123719). Results: The search retrieved 9309 potential studies, of which 233 were included in the review. In total, 76 (33%) of the 233 studies used a theory and 24 different theories were used. Bandura’s social cognitive theory was the most frequently used (48 studies), but 22 other theories were used in a minority of studies. Most studies used theories minimally to justify or provide a rationale for the study, to develop the intervention, to select outcomes, and/or to explain the results. Only eight studies fully used a theory in the rationale, intervention development, choice of outcomes, and discussion. Conclusion: The use of theories to guide self-care research is limited, which may pose a barrier in accumulating knowledge underlying self-care interventions.
KW - Chronic conditions
KW - Interventions
KW - Research
KW - Scoping review
KW - Self-care
KW - Self-management
KW - Theory
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85097905931&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/ijerph17249480
DO - 10.3390/ijerph17249480
M3 - Review article
C2 - 33348884
AN - SCOPUS:85097905931
SN - 1661-7827
VL - 17
SP - 1
EP - 13
JO - International journal of environmental research and public health
JF - International journal of environmental research and public health
IS - 24
M1 - 9480
ER -