Psychology & health · 2016
Can illness beliefs, from the common-sense model, prospectively predict adherence to self-management behaviours? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Aujla N, Walker M, Sprigg N, Abrams K, Massey A, Vedhara K
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether people's beliefs about their illness, conceptualised by the common sense model (CSM), can prospectively predict adherence to self-management behaviours (including, attendance, medication, diet and exercise) in adults with acute and chronic physical illnesses.
DESIGN AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Electronic databases were searched in September 2014, for papers specifying the use of the 'CSM' in relation to 'self-management', 'rehabilitation' and 'adherence' in the context of physical illness. Six hundred abstracts emerged. Data from 52 relevant studies were extracted. Twenty-one studies were meta-analysed, using correlation coefficients in random effects models. The remainder were descriptively synthesised.
RESULTS: The effect sizes for individual illness belief domains and adherence to self-management behaviours ranged from .04 to .13, indicating very weak, predictive relationships. Further analysis revealed that predictive relationships did not differ by the: type of self-management behaviour; acute or chronic illness; or duration of follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Individual illness belief domains, outlined by the CSM, did not predict adherence to self-management behaviours in adults with physical illnesses. Prospective relationships, controlling for past behaviour, also did not emerge. Other factors, including patients' treatment beliefs and inter-relationships between individual illness beliefs domains, may have influenced potential associations with adherence to self-management behaviours.
DESIGN AND MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Electronic databases were searched in September 2014, for papers specifying the use of the 'CSM' in relation to 'self-management', 'rehabilitation' and 'adherence' in the context of physical illness. Six hundred abstracts emerged. Data from 52 relevant studies were extracted. Twenty-one studies were meta-analysed, using correlation coefficients in random effects models. The remainder were descriptively synthesised.
RESULTS: The effect sizes for individual illness belief domains and adherence to self-management behaviours ranged from .04 to .13, indicating very weak, predictive relationships. Further analysis revealed that predictive relationships did not differ by the: type of self-management behaviour; acute or chronic illness; or duration of follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Individual illness belief domains, outlined by the CSM, did not predict adherence to self-management behaviours in adults with physical illnesses. Prospective relationships, controlling for past behaviour, also did not emerge. Other factors, including patients' treatment beliefs and inter-relationships between individual illness beliefs domains, may have influenced potential associations with adherence to self-management behaviours.