时间自我调节理论及其构念能否预测药物依从性?系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 6.6 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Health Psychology Review Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-10-11 DOI:10.1080/17437199.2022.2127831
Caitlin Liddelow, Barbara Mullan, Mark Boyes, Mathew Ling
{"title":"时间自我调节理论及其构念能否预测药物依从性?系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Caitlin Liddelow, Barbara Mullan, Mark Boyes, Mathew Ling","doi":"10.1080/17437199.2022.2127831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The relationships between temporal self-regulation theory (TST) constructs (intention, behavioural prepotency and self-regulatory capacity) and medication adherence should be established before further applying the theory to adherence. Searches of PsychINFO, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science were conducted in 2019 (updated November 2021). Studies had to be original quantitative research, assessed the relationship between one of the constructs and adherence in one illness, and used an adult population. The risk of bias was assessed using the NHLBI Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Three meta-analyses were conducted using <i>R</i>. Moderation analyses were also conducted. A total of 57 articles (60 studies) with 13,995 participants were included, with 7 studies included in more than one analysis. Results identified significant correlations between intention (<i>r</i> = .369, [95% CI: .25, .48]), behavioural prepotency (<i>r</i> = .332, [95% CI: .18, .48]), self-regulatory capacity (<i>r</i> = .213, [95% CI: .10, .32]) and adherence. There was some evidence of publication bias and no significant moderators. No studies explored the interactions in the theory, so whilst the constructs adequately predict adherence, future research should apply the theory to adherence in a specific illness to assess these relationships. Pre-registered on Prospero: CRD42019141395.</p>","PeriodicalId":48034,"journal":{"name":"Health Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can temporal self-regulation theory and its constructs predict medication adherence? A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Caitlin Liddelow, Barbara Mullan, Mark Boyes, Mathew Ling\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17437199.2022.2127831\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The relationships between temporal self-regulation theory (TST) constructs (intention, behavioural prepotency and self-regulatory capacity) and medication adherence should be established before further applying the theory to adherence. Searches of PsychINFO, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science were conducted in 2019 (updated November 2021). Studies had to be original quantitative research, assessed the relationship between one of the constructs and adherence in one illness, and used an adult population. The risk of bias was assessed using the NHLBI Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Three meta-analyses were conducted using <i>R</i>. Moderation analyses were also conducted. A total of 57 articles (60 studies) with 13,995 participants were included, with 7 studies included in more than one analysis. Results identified significant correlations between intention (<i>r</i> = .369, [95% CI: .25, .48]), behavioural prepotency (<i>r</i> = .332, [95% CI: .18, .48]), self-regulatory capacity (<i>r</i> = .213, [95% CI: .10, .32]) and adherence. There was some evidence of publication bias and no significant moderators. No studies explored the interactions in the theory, so whilst the constructs adequately predict adherence, future research should apply the theory to adherence in a specific illness to assess these relationships. Pre-registered on Prospero: CRD42019141395.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48034,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Psychology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2022.2127831\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/10/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2022.2127831","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

时间自我调节理论(TST)的构念(意向、行为优势和自我调节能力)与药物依从性之间的关系有待建立,然后才能将该理论进一步应用于依从性。2019年检索PsychINFO、Medline、EMBASE、CINAHL和Web of Science(更新日期为2021年11月)。研究必须是原始的定量研究,评估一种结构与一种疾病的依从性之间的关系,并使用成人人群。使用NHLBI观察性队列和横断面研究质量评估工具评估偏倚风险。使用r进行了三项荟萃分析,并进行了适度分析。共纳入57篇文章(60项研究),13995名受试者,其中7项研究纳入了不止一项分析。结果发现意图(r =。369, [95% CI: 0.25, 0.48]),行为早熟(r =。332, [95% CI: .18, .48]),自我调节能力(r =。213, [95% CI: 0.10, 0.32])和依从性。有一些发表偏倚的证据,没有显著的调节因子。没有研究探索理论中的相互作用,因此,虽然结构充分预测依从性,但未来的研究应该将理论应用于特定疾病的依从性,以评估这些关系。在普洛斯彼罗预注册:CRD42019141395。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Can temporal self-regulation theory and its constructs predict medication adherence? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The relationships between temporal self-regulation theory (TST) constructs (intention, behavioural prepotency and self-regulatory capacity) and medication adherence should be established before further applying the theory to adherence. Searches of PsychINFO, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science were conducted in 2019 (updated November 2021). Studies had to be original quantitative research, assessed the relationship between one of the constructs and adherence in one illness, and used an adult population. The risk of bias was assessed using the NHLBI Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Three meta-analyses were conducted using R. Moderation analyses were also conducted. A total of 57 articles (60 studies) with 13,995 participants were included, with 7 studies included in more than one analysis. Results identified significant correlations between intention (r = .369, [95% CI: .25, .48]), behavioural prepotency (r = .332, [95% CI: .18, .48]), self-regulatory capacity (r = .213, [95% CI: .10, .32]) and adherence. There was some evidence of publication bias and no significant moderators. No studies explored the interactions in the theory, so whilst the constructs adequately predict adherence, future research should apply the theory to adherence in a specific illness to assess these relationships. Pre-registered on Prospero: CRD42019141395.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Psychology Review
Health Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The publication of Health Psychology Review (HPR) marks a significant milestone in the field of health psychology, as it is the first review journal dedicated to this important and rapidly growing discipline. Edited by a highly respected team, HPR provides a critical platform for the review, development of theories, and conceptual advancements in health psychology. This prestigious international forum not only contributes to the progress of health psychology but also fosters its connection with the broader field of psychology and other related academic and professional domains. With its vital insights, HPR is a must-read for those involved in the study, teaching, and practice of health psychology, behavioral medicine, and related areas.
期刊最新文献
Components of multiple health behaviour change interventions for patients with chronic conditions: a systematic review and meta-regression of randomized trials. Identifying the psychosocial barriers and facilitators associated with the uptake of genetic services for hereditary cancer syndromes: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Protection motivation theory and health behaviour: conceptual review, discussion of limitations, and recommendations for best practice and future research. Inhibitory control training to reduce appetitive behaviour: a meta-analytic investigation of effectiveness, potential moderators, and underlying mechanisms of change. Psychosocial determinants of alternative protein choices: a meta-review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1