Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38627849›Full record

ReviewImplementation science communications2024

Identifying barriers and facilitators to primary care practitioners implementing health assessments for people with intellectual disability: a Theoretical Domains Framework-informed scoping review.

Paul Caltabiano, Jodie Bailie, Alison Laycock, Bradley Shea, Sally Hall Dykgraaf, Nicholas Lennox, Kanchana Ekanayake, Ross Bailie

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Implementation science communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Barriers and facilitators in the implementation of nutrition interventions to prevent or treat malnutrition in older adults: A scoping review.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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.

Paul CaltabianoSchool of Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Dubbo, Australia.
Jodie BailieUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, Australia. jodie.bailie@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4393-5773
Alison LaycockUniversity Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7756-4398
Bradley SheaSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.
Sally Hall DykgraafRural Clinical School, Australian National University, ACT, Canberra, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8532-1086
Nicholas LennoxQueensland Centre for Intellectual and Developmental Disability, Mater Research Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3201-3186
Kanchana EkanayakeUniversity of Sydney Library, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4324-311X
Ross BailieSchool of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5966-3368

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 1116385National Health and Medical Research Council 2010290
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPeople with intellectual disability experience poorer health outcomes compared with the general population, partly due to the difficulties of accessing preventive care in primary care settings. There is good evidence that structured annual health assessments can enhance quality of care for people with intellectual disability, and their use has become recommended policy in several high-income countries. However, uptake remains low. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) offers a conceptual structure for understanding barriers to implementation and has been usefully applied to inform implementation of health assessments for other high-need groups, but not for people with intellectual disability. We conducted a scoping review of the literature, using the TDF, to identify barriers and facilitators influencing primary care practitioners' implementation of annual health assessments for people with intellectual disability as part of routine primary care practice.

methodsThis study was conducted according to the JBI methodological approach for scoping reviews. Searches were conducted in Medline (OVID-SP), Embase (OVID-SP), PsycINFO (OVID-SP), CINHAL (EBSCO), Scopus (Elsevier) and Web of Science (Clarivate) for relevant peer-reviewed publications up to May 2023. Screening, full-text review and data extraction were completed by two independent reviewers. Data were extracted and mapped to the TDF to identify relevant barriers and facilitators.

resultsThe search yielded 1057 publications, with 21 meeting the inclusion criteria. Mapping data to the TDF, the most frequently identified domains were (a) environmental context and resources, (b) skills, (c) knowledge and (d) emotion. Predominant factors impacting on implementation included practitioners' lack of awareness about health assessments and their identified benefits; inadequate training and experience by practitioners in the delivery of health assessments for people with intellectual disability; insufficient time to provide health assessments; and practitioner burnout.

conclusionUsing a theory-informed behavioural framework, our review aids understanding of the barriers and facilitators to improving the implementation of health assessments as part of routine care for people with intellectual disability. However, there is a clear need for further qualitative research to examine the perceptions of primary care practitioners regarding implementation barriers and facilitators to health assessments in general, including views from practitioners who are not currently undertaking health assessments.

Indexed as

Health assessmentsImplementationIntellectual disabilityPrimary careScoping reviewTheoretical domains framework

Identifiers

PMID38627849
PMCPMC11020327

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.