ReviewJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2024
Theoretical Domains Framework: A Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis from 2005-2023.
Review in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experiences of professional public health advocacy in the UK health and social care system: a qualitative survey study [using the Theoretical Domains Framework].Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- The realism of behavioral theory-based vs. non-theory-based AI agents during a simulated infant formula shortage.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Healthcare Providers' Perspectives on the Involvement of Mental Health Providers in Chronic Pain Management.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence and digital health in vascular surgery: a 2-decade bibliometric analysis of research landscapes and evolving frontiers.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Barriers and facilitators of nurse second victim of patient safety incident actively to seek support: a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) is among the most extensively utilised foundational frameworks in implementation science. It was developed from 33 psychological theories, with the latest version identifying 14 domains encompassing 84 theoretical constructs. These domains and constructs capture the complexity of factors that affect behaviours, making the framework a valuable tool for designing and implementing interventions within health and social care settings. Objective: To summarise the development, hot topics, and future trends in TDF-related research and provide implementation practitioners with more information on the application of TDF. Methods: We used TDF as the topic and searched the ISI Web of Science Core Collection, identifying 1382 relevant publications. We used analytical tools such as Excel, Tableau, VOSviewer, and Citespace to conduct a bibliometric analysis of the relevant publication. Results: We identified the United Kingdom as the primary contributor, with University College London as the key institution. Susan Michie ranked highest in total citations. The analysis highlighted cancer and stroke as primary clinic medicine-related topics using TDF. Emerging themes encompass abuse, violence, maternal health, antenatal care, patient involvement, and trauma-informed care et al. "Nurse" and "qualitative research" emerged as recent and enduring hotspots, possibly indicating future research trends. Conclusion: This article represents the first attempt to summarise the TDF using bibliometric analysis. We suggest this method can be used to analyse other theoretical frameworks in scientific implementation of its objectivity and quantifiability. Overall, the application scope of TDF is shifting from public health towards more specialised clinical directions, although its application in the field of public health is continuously expanding. In the future, the number of users of TDF is also expected to expand from implementation scientists to professional technical personnel.
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.