The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence-based guidelines are often not implemented effectively with the result that best health outcomes are not achieved. This may be due to a lack of theoretical understanding of the processes involved in changing the behaviour of healthcare professionals. This paper reports the development of a consensus on a theoretical framework that could be used in implementation research. The objectives were to identify an agreed set of key theoretical constructs for use in (1) studying the implementation of evidence based practice and (2) developing strategies for effective implementation, and to communicate these constructs to an interdisciplinary audience. METHODS: Six phases of work were conducted to develop a consensus: (1) identifying theoretical constructs; (2) simplifying into construct domains; (3) evaluating the importance of the construct domains; (4) interdisciplinary evaluation; (5) validating the domain list; and (6) piloting interview questions. The contributors were a "psychological theory" group (n = 18), a "health services research" group (n = 13), and a "health psychology" group (n = 30). RESULTS: Twelve domains were identified to explain behaviour change: (1) knowledge, (2) skills, (3) social/professional role and identity, (4) beliefs about capabilities, (5) beliefs about consequences, (6) motivation and goals, (7) memory, attention and decision processes, (8) environmental context and resources, (9) social influences, (10) emotion regulation, (11) behavioural regulation, and (12) nature of the behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: A set of behaviour change domains agreed by a consensus of experts is available for use in implementation research. Applications of this domain list will enhance understanding of the behaviour change processes inherent in implementation of evidence-based practice and will also test the validity of these proposed domains.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Whilst this framework of 12 theoretical domains has proved useful in assessing and intervening with implementation problems [9], the domain of behaviour has remained under-theorised and therefore underused in its application.”
From The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions (2011) · cites this paper as [9]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The group identified 33 theories and 128 key theoretical constructs related to behaviour change and synthesised them into a single framework”
From Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research (2012) · cites this paper as [13]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“It has been increasingly acknowledged that consideration of patient acceptability using theories of behaviour change are key to effective evaluation, design and implementation of healthcare interventions [23–25] .”
From 'I didn't know what to expect': Exploring patient perspectives to identify targets for change to improve telephone-delivered psychological interventions (2020) · cites this paper as [24]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The TDF is an integrated theoretical framework synthesised from 128 theoretical constructs from 33 theories judged most relevant to implementation questions.”
From A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A synthesis of 33 theories of behaviour and behaviour change clustered into 14 (originally 12) domains [15,16];”
From A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“'Nature of the behaviour' was identified as one of 12 theoretical domains of influence on implementation-relevant behaviours [9].”
From The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions (2011) · cites this paper as [9]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“an integrative framework of theories of behaviour change was developed by 18 psychological theorists in collaboration with 16 health service researchers and 30 health psychologists [13].”
From Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research (2012) · cites this paper as [13]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This resulted in 12 theoretical domains and exemplar questions for each to use in interviews or focus groups”
From Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research (2012) · cites this paper as [13]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Following thematic analysis, themes and constituent codes were mapped to the TDF [24] by KR, EH and KA. Mapping was undertaken by determining the ‘fit’ of themes and codes with domains using domain descriptions as working definitions [25].Once mapping was complete, data were checked a final time by KR and then validated by JG to confirm fit with the framework; any discrepancies during the mapping”
From 'I didn't know what to expect': Exploring patient perspectives to identify targets for change to improve telephone-delivered psychological interventions (2020) · cites this paper as [24]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Interviews followed a semi-structured schedule, taking into consideration elements of the TDF [24], and TFA [23]. Once drafted, interview schedules were reviewed by the EQUITy Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP).”
From 'I didn't know what to expect': Exploring patient perspectives to identify targets for change to improve telephone-delivered psychological interventions (2020) · cites this paper as [24]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The TDF facilitated in mapping the study findings into coherent areas to target for change providing a theoretically robust premise for later-stage implementation studies [24, 25].”
From 'I didn't know what to expect': Exploring patient perspectives to identify targets for change to improve telephone-delivered psychological interventions (2020) · cites this paper as [24]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In an effort to make theories more accessible to those working in implementation, a team of behavioural scientists developed the TDF in collaboration with implementation researchers [15].”
From A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was initially developed for implementation research to identify influences on health professional behaviour related to implementation of evidence-based recommendations and has been cited in over 800 peer-review publications (Web of Knowledge accessed April 2017).”
From A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Whilst the domains cover the physical and social environment, the majority relate to individual motivation and capability factors.”
From A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“the TDF is a theoretical framework rather than a theory; it does not propose testable relationships between elements but provides a theoretical lens through which to view the cognitive, affective, social and environmental influences on behaviour.”
From A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“the TDF is a theoretical framework rather than a theory; it does not propose testable relationships between elements but provides a theoretical lens through which to view the cognitive, affective, social and environmental influences on behaviour.”
From A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems (2017) · cites this paper as [15]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Useful guidance from the UK Medical Research Council for developing and evaluating complex interventions advocates drawing on theory in intervention design but does not specify how to select and apply theory [9].”
From The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions (2011) · cites this paper as [9]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Poor theoretical underpinning makes it difficult to understand and explain how and why implementation succeeds or fails, thus restraining opportunities to identify factors that predict the likelihood of implementation success and develop better strategies to achieve more successful implementation.”
From Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks (2015) · cites this paper as [3]
In the citing paper
“This discipline-specific approach in the targeted innovations, settings, and end-users, has resulted in multiple and potentially disparate frameworks being developed and used [4,6-12].”
From A systematic review of implementation frameworks of innovations in healthcare and resulting generic implementation framework (2015) · cites this paper as [10]
In the citing paper
“Implementation and knowledge translation frameworks have predominantly developed within disciplines.”
From A systematic review of implementation frameworks of innovations in healthcare and resulting generic implementation framework (2015) · cites this paper as [10]
In the citing paper
“In the ensuing 9 years, the field has expanded considerably and further taxonomies, checklists, conceptual frameworks, theories, and models of implementation have been developed [10,13,14,17,18].”
From A systematic review of implementation frameworks of innovations in healthcare and resulting generic implementation framework (2015) · cites this paper as [10]
In the citing paper
“we propose that the concept of the individual might incorporate: capability, capacity, motivation (including recognising a need for change), resilience, acceptability, feelings, knowledge and beliefs (including self efficacy) about the intervention/evidence, position and fit within the organization/social system, and approach to decision-making (e.g., experimentation, use of information).”
From The role of evidence, context, and facilitation in an implementation trial: implications for the development of the PARIHS framework (2013) · cites this paper as [42]
In the citing paper
“Further, there are intervention development frameworks (e.g. the Behaviour Change Wheel Guide [72], Intervention Mapping [60] and the Theoretical Domains Framework [64, 65]), which offer guidance as to which BCTs to select for targeting mechanisms of action.”
In the citing paper
“The TDF specifies 14 theoretical domains, each of which includes several theoretical constructs that are similar in definition, but derive from different theories, and which may be relevant to understanding and changing behaviour.”
In the citing paper
“and suggest that Michie et al.’s (2005) 12-domain original version might be more applicable in developing a TDF-based questionnaire.”
From Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research (2014) · cites this paper as Michie et al.’s (2005)
In the citing paper
“The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) [31] was developed as an integrative framework of theories of behavior change to overcome these challenges.”
From Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research (2014) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“The framework includes 12 theoretical domains of potential behavioral determinants and provides exemplar questions for the theoretical assessment of implementation problems.”
From Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research (2014) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“Since its original development, the consensus study that produced the TDF [31] has been validated, leading to Cane et al.’s [37] refined TDF.”
From Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research (2014) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“the refinement of the domain Motivation and goals of the original TDF [31] into the domains Goals and Intentions in the recent version of the TDF and the classification of multiple goal-related constructs to the domains Goals, Intentions, and Behavioral regulation imply overlap between these domains”
From Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research (2014) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“the domain Reinforcement is a refinement of the Beliefs about consequences domain and was originally included within the latter domain in the original TDF [31]”
From Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research (2014) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“a valid TDF-based questionnaire will increase the use of theory in the assessment of barriers and facilitators for implementation problems [31,69,70], which can inform the selection of possible techniques that can be used to change healthcare professionals’ behaviors [15,23,26]”
From Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research (2014) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“The results partly support Cane et al.’s validation of the TDF [37] and suggest that the 12-domain version [31] might be more applicable in developing a TDF-based questionnaire.”
From Discriminant content validity of a theoretical domains framework questionnaire for use in implementation research (2014) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“Michie et al. [20] applied a systematic consensus approach to develop a framework grounded in psychological theory that simplifies theories relevant to behaviour change. The consensus identified 12 theoretical domains from 33 theories and 128 constructs that may explain health-related behaviour change.”
In the citing paper
“The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) can be used to inform the choice of potential behaviour change techniques to develop interventions as well as to investigate determinants of behaviour [20].”
In the citing paper
“They reflect calls for the use of theories to generate testable hypotheses linking tailored strategies with factors that promote or inhibit implementation, and various attempts to identify theories or constructs within theories best suited for successful implementation [15].”
From Development of a theory of implementation and integration: Normalization Process Theory (2009) · cites this paper as [15]
In the citing paper
“All of these factors play a central role in behavior change associated with effective mental health treatments [87,88,89]”
From eMental Healthcare Technologies for Anxiety and Depression in Childhood and Adolescence: Systematic Review of Studies Reporting Implementation Outcomes (2018) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“Practice change theories [19–22] and reviews of clinical practice change interventions suggest that interventions that address multiple barriers to care provision may be more likely to be effective [23, 24].”
From Increasing the provision of preventive care by community healthcare services: a stepped wedge implementation trial (2017) · cites this paper as [21]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 · Cited by 43,925
(1975) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 36,737
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1978) · Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/0146-6402(78)90002-4 · Cited by 10,586
Health promotion from the perspective of Social Cognitive Theory
Bandura, A. (1998) · Psychology & Health · doi:10.1080/08870449808407422 · Cited by 3,087
Health Belief Model and Personal Health Behavior
Becker, M. H. (1976) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,065
A guide to constructs of control.
Skinner, E. A. (1996) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.549 · Cited by 1,918
Oxman, A. D., Thomson, M., Davis, D. A., & Haynes, R. B. (1995) · PubMed Central · Cited by 1,847
(2001) · PubMed · Cited by 1,709
Advances in Motivation and Achievement
(2014) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/s0749-742320140000018017 · Cited by 1,545
Implementation intentions and effective goal pursuit.
Gollwitzer, P. M., & Brandstätter, V. (1997) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.186 · Cited by 1,343
(2018) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315167534 · Cited by 1,147
Eccles, M., Grimshaw, J., Walker, A., Johnston, M., & Pitts, N. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.09.002 · Cited by 917 · cited 1×
“21 There are several processes that could explain the success of this”
BackgroundPersonal paper: Beliefs and evidence in changing clinical practice
Grol, R. P. T. M. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7105.418 · Cited by 826
Implementing guidelines and innovations in general practice: which interventions are effective?
Wensing, M., van der Weijden, T., & Grol, R. P. T. M. (1998) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 417
Helping People Change: A Textbook of Methods
Kanfer, F. H., & Goldstein, A. P. (1975) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 318
Changing clinical behaviour by making guidelines specific
Michie, S., & Johnston, M. (2004) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7435.343 · Cited by 309
Self-citationHardeman, W., Griffin, S., Johnston, M., Kinmonth, A., & Wareham, N. (2000) · International Journal of Obesity · doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0801100 · Cited by 283
Making better use of research findings
Haines, A., & Donald, A. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.317.7150.72 · Cited by 253
Sears, D. O., Peplau, L. A., & Taylor, S. E. (1991) · Cited by 197
(BCIO), B. C. I. O. (2022) · Definitions · doi:10.32388/ddp5lr · Cited by 164
Walker, A. E., Grimshaw, J., Johnston, M., Pitts, N., Steen, N., & Eccles, M. (2003) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/1472-6963-3-22 · Cited by 133
Helping People Change: A Textbook of Methods
Good, R. (1992) · International Journal of Group Psychotherapy · doi:10.1080/00207284.1992.11732591 · Cited by 116
Changing the clinical behavior of doctors: a psychological framework.
Robertson, N., Baker, R., & Hearnshaw, H. (1996) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qshc.5.1.51 · Cited by 111
Impact of Patient Socioeconomic Status on Physician Profiles
Fiscella, K. A., & Franks, P. J. (2001) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-200101000-00003 · Cited by 71
Hand hygiene and aseptic technique in the emergency department
Al-Damouk, M., Pudney, E., & Bleetman, A. (2004) · Journal of Hospital Infection · doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2003.09.022 · Cited by 35
Helping people change: A textbook of methods, 4th ed.
Kanfer, F. H., & Goldstein, A. P. (1991) · Cited by 27
Changing clinical behaviour by making guidelines specific
(2004) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/qhc.13.5.355 · Cited by 17
Hemoglobin Jianghua [beta 120(GH3) LYS leads to ILE]: a new fast-moving variant found in China.
Lu, Y., Fan, J. L., Liu, J., Hui-Lian, H., Peng, X., Huang, C. H., Huang, P. Y., Chen, S., Jai, P. C., & Ke-gong, Y. (1983) · PubMed · Cited by 6
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- [4]4. Grimshaw J, Thomas R, Maclennan G, et al. Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination strategies. Health Technol Assess 2004;8:6:1-84.
- [8]8. Grol R. Beliefs and evidence in changing clinical practice. BMJ 1997;315:418-21.
- [12]12. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: towards a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychol Rev 1977;84:191-215.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-42 · Cited by 13,697
“Whilst this framework of 12 theoretical domains has proved useful in assessing and intervening with implementation problems [9], the domain of behaviour has remained under-theorised and therefore underused in its application.”
InfluentialSelf-citationProctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., Griffey, R., & Hensley, M. (2011) · Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research · doi:10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7 · Cited by 8,721
Michie, S., Richardson, M., Johnston, M., Abraham, C., Francis, J., Hardeman, W., Eccles, M. P., Cane, J., & Wood, C. E. (2013) · Annals of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/s12160-013-9486-6 · Cited by 7,629
Self-citationCane, J., O’Connor, D., & Michie, S. (2012) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-7-37 · Cited by 4,888
“To overcome such problems, an integrative framework of theories of behaviour change was developed by 18 psychological theorists in collaboration with 16 health service researchers and 30 health psychologists [13].”
BackgroundMethodSelf-citationPowell, B. J., Waltz, T. J., Chinman, M. J., Damschroder, L. J., Smith, J. L., Matthieu, M. M., Proctor, E. K., & Kirchner, J. E. (2015) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0209-1 · Cited by 4,963
Metadata
- Authors
- Michie, S.
- Affiliations
- University College London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Michie, S
- ORCID
- Michie, S
- Venue
- Quality and Safety in Health Care
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2005-02-01
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 26-33
- ISSN
- 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-3901
- PMC
- PMC1743963
- OpenAlex
- W2116567300
- Semantic Scholar
- bdf39eabaf7691033bd0ad16d7d7fa59c92141a9
- Cited by
- 3,440
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 186 · 2025: 221 · 2024: 317 · 2023: 310 · 2022: 372 · 2021: 327 · 2020: 349 · 2019: 209 · 2018: 202 · 2017: 152 · 2016: 159 · 2015: 149 · 2014: 118 · 2013: 103 · 2012: 72
- FWCI
- 39.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- BMJ Quality & Safety (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- British Psychological Society
- Medical Research Council
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Keywords
- evidence-based practice implementation, behavior change, theoretical constructs, consensus development, implementation research, healthcare professional behaviour, health psychology, social influence, emotion regulation, professional role and identity, knowledge and skills
- MeSH terms
- United Kingdom, Health Personnel, Humans, Models, Psychological, Evidence-Based Medicine
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
