Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29176800›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2017

Disentangling self-management goal setting and action planning: A scoping review.

Stephanie Anna Lenzen, Ramon Daniëls, Marloes Amantia van Bokhoven, Trudy van der Weijden, Anna Beurskens

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisScoping Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Timing, setting, and content of patient education prior to goal setting for cancer survivors: a scoping review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Hospital Managers' Decision-Making Puzzle.Iranian journal of public health · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Stephanie Anna LenzenResearch Centre for Autonomy and Participation for People with a Chronic Illness, Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Heerlen, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7803-8506
Ramon DaniëlsResearch Centre for Autonomy and Participation for People with a Chronic Illness, Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Heerlen, the Netherlands.
Marloes Amantia van BokhovenDepartment of Family Medicine, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Trudy van der WeijdenDepartment of Family Medicine, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Anna BeurskensResearch Centre for Autonomy and Participation for People with a Chronic Illness, Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Heerlen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe ongoing rise in the numbers of chronically ill people necessitates efforts for effective self-management. Goal setting and action planning are frequently used, as they are thought to support patients in changing their behavior. However, it remains unclear how goal setting and action planning in the context of self-management are defined in the scientific literature. This study aimed to achieve a better understanding of the various definitions used.

methodsA scoping review was conducted, searching PubMed, Cinahl, PsychINFO and Cochrane. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were formulated to ensure the focus on goal setting/action planning and self-management. The literature was updated to December 2015; data selection and charting was done by two reviewers. A qualitative content analysis approach was used.

resultsOut of 9115 retrieved articles, 58 met the inclusion criteria. We created an overview of goal setting phases that were applied (preparation, formulation of goals, formulation of action plan, coping planning and follow-up). Although the phases we found are in accordance with commonly known frameworks for goal setting, it was striking that the majority of studies (n = 39, 67%) did not include all phases. We also prepared an overview of components and strategies for each goal setting phase. Interestingly, few strategies were found for the communication between patients and professionals about goals/action plans. Most studies (n = 35, 60%) focused goal setting on one single disease and on a predefined lifestyle behavior; nearly half of the articles (n = 27, 47%) reported a theoretical framework. DISCUSSION: The results might provide practical support for developers of interventions. Moreover, our results might encourage professionals to become more aware of the phases of the goal setting process and of strategies emphasizing on patient reflection. However, more research might be useful to examine strategies to facilitate communication about goals/action plans. It might also be worthwhile to develop and evaluate goal setting/action planning strategies for people with different and multiple chronic conditions.

Indexed as

GoalsHealth PlanningSelf-ManagementFollow-Up StudiesHumans

Identifiers

PMID29176800
PMCPMC5703565

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.