Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35524217›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2022

Translating qualitative data into intervention content using the Theoretical Domains Framework and stakeholder co-design: a worked example from a study of cervical screening attendance in older women.

Alison Bravington, Hong Chen, Judith Dyson, Lesley Jones, Christopher Dalgliesh, Amée Bryan, Julietta Patnick, Una Macleod

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. DOST: A consolidated health behavior model that maps factors influencing cancer screening uptake.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Alison BravingtonHull York Medical School, University of Hull, Kingston-Upon-Hull, UK. alison.bravington@hyms.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0680-2093
Hong ChenWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Judith DysonCentre for Social Care, Health and Related Research, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, UK.
Lesley JonesHull York Medical School, University of Hull, Kingston-Upon-Hull, UK.
Christopher DalglieshHull York Medical School, University of Hull, Kingston-Upon-Hull, UK.
Amée BryanDurham University, Durham, UK.
Julietta PatnickNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Una MacleodHull York Medical School, University of Hull, Kingston-Upon-Hull, UK.
University of Hull · GBBirmingham City University · GBDurham University · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Yorkshire Cancer Research H393
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious screening interventions have demonstrated a series of features related to social determinants which have increased uptake in targeted populations, including the assessment of health beliefs and barriers to screening attendance as part of intervention development. Many studies cite the use of theory to identify methods of behaviour change, but fail to describe in detail how theoretical constructs are transformed into intervention content. The aim of this study was to use data from a qualitative exploration of cervical screening in women over 50 in the UK as the basis of intervention co-design with stakeholders using behavioural change frameworks. We describe the identification of behavioural mechanisms from qualitative data, and how these were used to develop content for a service-user leaflet and a video animation for practitioner training. The interventions aimed to encourage sustained commitment to cervical screening among women over 50, and to increase sensitivity to age-related problems in screening among primary care practitioners.

methodsSecondary coding of a qualitative data set to extract barriers and facilitators of cervical screening attendance. Barrier and facilitator statements were categorised using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify relevant behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Key TDF domains and associated BCTs were presented in stakeholder focus groups to guide the design of intervention content and mode of delivery.

resultsBehavioural determinants relating to attendance clustered under three domains: beliefs about consequences, emotion and social influences, which mapped to three BCTs respectively: (1) persuasive communication/information provision; (2) stress management; (3) role modelling and encouragement. Service-user stakeholders translated these into three pragmatic intervention components: (i) addressing unanswered questions, (ii) problem-solving practitioner challenges and (iii) peer group communication. Based on (ii), practitioner stakeholders developed a call to action in three areas - clinical networking, history-taking, and flexibility in screening processes. APEASE informed modes of delivery (a service-user leaflet and a cartoon animation for practitioners).

conclusionThe application of the TDF to qualitative data can provide an auditable protocol for the translation of qualitative data into intervention content.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAgedBehavior TherapyFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMass ScreeningBehaviour changeCervical screeningIntervention developmentQualitativeStakeholder involvementTheoretical domains framework

Identifiers

PMID35524217
PMCPMC9074234
OpenAlexW4229003838

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.