SynthesisImplementation science : IS2018
Application of the COM-B model to barriers and facilitators to chlamydia testing in general practice for young people and primary care practitioners: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Implementation science : IS, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06843213 (Teaching Health Promotion and Resilience in Varied Environments), which is not on this map. Cited by 115 papers, 18 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Teaching Health Promotion and Resilience in Varied Environments: a Peer-led Intervention Following Hospital Discharge
Who cites it
115 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Barriers and Facilitators to The Involvement of Under-Represented Children and Young People (aged 8-25) in Mental Health Research - a Systematic Review.Clinical child and family psychology review · 2025Pooled it
- Patient reported barriers and facilitators of chronic kidney disease care in Sub-Saharan Africa: a mixed methods systematic review using the COM-B model.BMC nephrology · 2025Pooled it
- Barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making for patients with cancer and health care providers based on the COM-B model: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Pooled it
- Equitable inclusion of patients with cancer on the palliative care register: a systematic review in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Behavioural factors influencing hand hygiene practices across domestic, institutional and public community settings: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis.BMJ global health · 2025Pooled it
- Barriers and facilitators of acceptability and uptake of long-acting reversible contraceptives in Ethiopia: a systematic review using the COM-B model.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Barriers and facilitators of benzathine penicillin G adherence among rheumatic heart disease patients: a mixed methods systematic review using the COM-B (capability, opportunity, and motivation for behavior) model.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Barriers and facilitators to self-management of chronic conditions reported by women: a systematic review of qualitative studies.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Strategies to implement evidence-informed decision making at the organizational level: a rapid systematic review.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Patient-related barriers and enablers to the implementation of high-value physiotherapy for chronic pain: a systematic review.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2024Pooled it
- The sexual and reproductive health needs and preferences of youths in sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-synthesis.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Improving healthcare professionals' interactions with patients to tackle antimicrobial resistance: a systematic review of interventions, barriers, and facilitators.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Why Do Employers (Fail to) Hire People with Disabilities? A Systematic Review of Capabilities, Opportunities and Motivations.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2023Pooled it
- Barriers and Facilitators to Participation in Health Screening: an Umbrella Review Across Conditions.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2022Pooled it
- Barriers and facilitators to clinical behaviour change by primary care practitioners: a theory-informed systematic review of reviews using the Theoretical Domains Framework and Behaviour Change Wheel.Systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Implementation practice models for development in low- and middle-income countries: systematic review of peer-reviewed literature.BMC public health · 2022Pooled it
- Health providers' and pregnant women's perspectives about smoking cessation support: a COM-B analysis of a global systematic review of qualitative studies.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Pooled it
- Digital Health Intervention on Awareness of Vaccination Against Influenza Among Adults With Diabetes: Pragmatic Randomized Follow-Up Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Trial
55 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChlamydia is a major public health concern, with high economic and social costs. In 2016, there were over 200,000 chlamydia diagnoses made in England. The highest prevalence rates are found among young people. Although annual testing for sexually active young people is recommended, many do not receive testing. General practice is one ideal setting for testing, yet attempts to increase testing in this setting have been disappointing. The Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Model of Behaviour (COM-B model) may help improve understanding of the underpinnings of chlamydia testing. The aim of this systematic review was to (1) identify barriers and facilitators to chlamydia testing for young people and primary care practitioners in general practice and (2) map facilitators and barriers onto the COM-B model.
methodsQualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies published after 2000 were included. Seven databases were searched to identify peer-reviewed publications which examined barriers and facilitators to chlamydia testing in general practice. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Data (i.e., participant quotations, theme descriptions, and survey results) regarding study design and key findings were extracted. The data was first analysed using thematic analysis, following this, the resultant factors were mapped onto the COM-B model components. All findings are reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
resultsFour hundred eleven papers were identified; 39 met the inclusion criteria. Barriers and facilitators were identified at the patient (e.g., knowledge), provider (e.g., time constraints), and service level (e.g., practice nurses). Factors were categorised into the subcomponents of the model: physical capability (e.g., practice nurse involvement), psychological capability (e.g.: lack of knowledge), reflective motivation (e.g., beliefs regarding perceived risk), automatic motivation (e.g., embarrassment and shame), physical opportunity (e.g., time constraints), social opportunity (e.g., stigma).
conclusionsThis systematic review provides a synthesis of the literature which acknowledges factors across multiple levels and components. The COM-B model provided the framework for understanding the complexity of chlamydia testing behaviour. While we cannot at this juncture state which component represents the most salient influence on chlamydia testing, across all three levels, multiple barriers and facilitators were identified relating psychological capability and physical and social opportunity. Implementation should focus on (1) normalisation, (2) communication, (3) infection-specific information, and (4) mode of testing. In order to increase chlamydia testing in general practice, a multifaceted theory- and evidence-based approach is needed.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42016041786.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.