ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2016
A change in behaviour: getting the balance right for research and policy.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Behaviour change interventions offer clinical pharmacists many opportunities to optimise the use of medicines. 'MINDSPACE' is a framework used by a Government-affiliated organisation in the United Kingdom to communicate an approach to changing behaviour through policy. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) organises constructs of psychological theories that are most relevant to behaviour change into 14 domains. Both frameworks offer a way of identifying what drives a change in behaviour, providing a target for an intervention. This article aims to compare and contrast MINDSPACE and the TDF, and serves to inform pharmacy practitioners about the potential strengths and weaknesses of using either framework in a clinical pharmacy context. It appears that neither framework can deliver evidence-based interventions that can be developed and implemented with the pace demanded by policy and practice-based settings. A collaborative approach would ensure timely development of acceptable behaviour change interventions that are grounded in evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27473708What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.