Cited by 133Health Policy Implementation ScienceBehavioral Health and InterventionsHealth Sciences Research and Education

PRIME – PRocess modelling in ImpleMEntation research: selecting a theoretical basis for interventions to change clinical practice

Open access
Walker, Anne E, Grimshaw, Jeremy, Johnston, Marie, Pitts, Nigel, Steen, Nick, Eccles, Martin·2003·BMC Health Services Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Biomedical research constantly produces new findings but these are not routinely translated into health care practice. One way to address this problem is to develop effective interventions to translate research findings into practice. Currently a range of empirical interventions are available and systematic reviews of these have demonstrated that there is no single best intervention. This evidence base is difficult to use in routine settings because it cannot identify which intervention is most likely to be effective (or cost effective) in a particular situation. We need to establish a scientific rationale for interventions. As clinical practice is a form of human behaviour, theories of human behaviour that have proved useful in other similar settings may provide a basis for developing a scientific rationale for the choice of interventions to translate research findings into clinical practice. The objectives of the study are: to amplify and populate scientifically validated theories of behaviour with evidence from the experience of health professionals; to use this as a basis for developing predictive questionnaires using replicable methods; to identify which elements of the questionnaire (i.e., which theoretical constructs) predict clinical practice and distinguish between evidence compliant and non-compliant practice; and on the basis of these results, to identify variables (based on theoretical constructs) that might be prime targets for behaviour change interventions. METHODS: We will develop postal questionnaires measuring two motivational, three action and one stage theory to explore five behaviours with 800 general medical and 600 general dental practitioners. We will collect data on performance for each of the behaviours. The relationships between predictor variables (theoretical constructs) and outcome measures (data on performance) in each survey will be assessed using multiple regression analysis and structural equation modelling. In the final phase of the project, the findings from all surveys will be analysed simultaneously adopting a random effects approach to investigate whether the relationships between predictor variables and outcome measures are modified by behaviour, professional group or geographical location.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1472-6963-3-22

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 71 · Cited by 133

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Iles V Sutherland K Organisational change: a review for health care managers and professionals and researchers London National Coordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R & D 2001
  2. Kanfer FH Goldstein AP ed Helping people change: a textbook of methods New York: Pergamon Press 1986
  3. Johnston M Wright S Weinman J Measures in health psychology: a users portfolio Oxford: NFER-Nelson 1995
  4. Conner M Norman P Eds Predicting Health Behaviour Buckingham: Open University Press 1996

Authors
Walker, A. E., Grimshaw, J., Johnston, M., Pitts, N., Steen, N., & Eccles, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
  • University of Dundee (GB)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Walker, Anne E
  • Grimshaw, Jeremy
  • Johnston, Marie
  • Pitts, Nigel
  • Steen, Nick
  • Eccles, Martin
Venue
BMC Health Services Research
Published
2003-12-19
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
22-22
ISSN
1472-6963 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2105547887
Cited by
133
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 11
FWCI
15.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
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 › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
Keywords
implementation research, behaviour change interventions, clinical practice change, research translation, motivation theories, philosophy of action, stage theory, general practitioners, general dentists, health professionals' practices
MeSH terms
Dentistry, Dentists, Diffusion of Innovation, Geography, United Kingdom, Health Plan Implementation, Humans, Models, Psychological, Motivation, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Physicians, Family, Psychological Theory, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, State Medicine, Evidence-Based Medicine, Guideline Adherence, Biomedical Research

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