Status of Theory Use in Self-Care Research

Tiny Jaarsma, Heleen Westland, Ercole Vellone, Kenneth E. Freedland, Carin Schröder, Jaap C. A. Trappenburg, Anna Strömberg and Barbara Riegel
Additional contact information
Tiny Jaarsma: Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linkoping University, 581 83 Linköping, Sweden
Heleen Westland: Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands
Ercole Vellone: Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, 00133 Roma, Italy
Kenneth E. Freedland: Department of Psychiatry, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA
Carin Schröder: Ecare4you, 3811 BJ Amersfoort, The Netherlands
Jaap C. A. Trappenburg: Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands
Anna Strömberg: Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linkoping University, 581 83 Linköping, Sweden
Barbara Riegel: School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA

IJERPH, 2020, vol. 17, issue 24, 1-13

Abstract: 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.

Keywords: self-care; self-management; interventions; research; theory; chronic conditions; interventions; scoping review (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/24/9480/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/24/9480/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:24:p:9480-:d:464058

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().