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}
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.
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.