ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2024
A scoping review of individual health responsibility: A context-base concept.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rethinking Empowerment in Healthcare: A Dynamic Continuum.Nursing inquiry · 2026Article
- Self-Perceived Individual Health Responsibility Among Healthcare Workers: Associated Factors and Relationship with Preventive Behaviors-A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Effects of a six-month yoga intervention on vascular parameters in sedentary office workers: An interrupted time-series study design.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
- Associations between cognitive function and vascular health in office-based sedentary workers: A six-month yoga intervention.Journal of education and health promotion · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndividual health responsibility plays an important role in maintaining and improving people's health. There are controversial opinions related to this concept. This study aimed to investigate controversial opinions related to individual health responsibility and familiarize researchers and policy makers with the available evidence and gap of knowledge in the recent years. MATERIAL AND
methodThis paper is a scoping review. The five-step approach of Arksey and O'Malley was used to review the relevant literature from the beginning of 2017 to the end of 2022. The search was done in the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, web of sciences, Cochrane databases, and Google Scholar search engine using the English keywords "health responsibility" AND "individual" OR "personal".
resultsAll articles and theses related to individual health responsibility, which were in English and had access to their full text, were included in the study. After a 2-stage screening for 1,412 articles and theses, 32 were included in the study. The findings indicated that most of the studies were conducted in developed European continent. The published articles included a wide range of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed research, and acute and chronic diseases have been considered in this field.
conclusionIndividual health responsibility is a multidimensional concept that is influenced by individual, social, and cultural factors, and emphasizing it can have both positive and negative effects on people's health. To the concept be effective in health promotion, it is important to pay attention to individual and social context, health status, and community and health policy makers views about individual health responsibility.
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.