Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41869542›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in health services2026

Transferring social-cognitive theories from individuals to healthcare professionals: a useful but simplified lens on clinical practice.

Per Nilsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in health services, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Per NilsenDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This conceptual analysis examines the transferability of social-cognitive theories from individual health behaviours to healthcare professionals' clinical behaviours. Although these theories provide a robust framework for explaining intentional and deliberative actions, their application to professional contexts risks oversimplifying the complex realities of healthcare work. Clinical behaviour is shaped not only by individual attitudes, beliefs, and perceived control but also by organizational hierarchies, procedural constraints, professional identity, and moral responsibility. Through analysis of empirical examples, the paper delineates the conditions under which social-cognitive theories retain explanatory power and those where alternative perspectives, such as workflow engineering, relational coordination, habit theory, and moral psychology, might offer greater insight. The paper argues for an integrative approach that situates individual cognition within environmental, organizational, and ethical contexts. By doing so, it refines understanding of when and how social-cognitive frameworks can inform implementation efforts, and where complementary theoretical lenses are needed to capture the realities of clinical practice.

Indexed as

behaviour changehealthcare professionalsorganizational contextsocial-cognitive theoriestransferability

Identifiers

PMID41869542
PMCPMC12999444

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.