For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
15
views
41
references
 Top references
cited by
13
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      517
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Systematic Review of Osteoporosis Health Beliefs in Adult Men and Women

      review-article
      Author(s): 1 , 1, 2 , *
      Publication date (Electronic):
      Journal: Journal of Osteoporosis
      Publisher: SAGE-Hindawi Access to Research

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Osteoporosis is major public health concern affecting millions of older adults worldwide. A systematic review was carried out to identify the most common osteoporosis health beliefs in adult men and women from descriptive and intervention studies. The Osteoporosis Health Belief Scale (OHBS) and Osteoporosis Self-efficacy Scale (OSES) evaluate osteoporosis health beliefs, including perceived susceptibility and seriousness, benefits, barriers, and self-efficacy of calcium and exercise, and health motivation, and their relationship to preventive health behaviours. A comprehensive search of studies that included OHBS and OSES subscale scores as outcomes was performed. Fifty full-text articles for citations were reviewed based on inclusion criteria. Twenty-two articles met the inclusion criteria. Greater perceived seriousness, benefits, self-efficacy, health motivation, and fewer barriers were the most common health-belief subscales in men and women. Few studies were interventions ( n = 6) and addressed osteoporosis health beliefs in men ( n = 8). Taking health beliefs into consideration when planning and conducting education interventions may be useful in both research and practice for osteoporosis prevention and management; however, more research in this area is needed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references41

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Health Belief Model: a decade later.

          N K Janz, M H Becker (1984)
          Since the last comprehensive review in 1974, the Health Belief Model (HBM) has continued to be the focus of considerable theoretical and research attention. This article presents a critical review of 29 HBM-related investigations published during the period of 1974-1984, tabulates the findings from 17 studies conducted prior to 1974, and provides a summary of the total 46 HBM studies (18 prospective, 28 retrospective). Twenty-four studies examined preventive-health behaviors (PHB), 19 explored sick-role behaviors (SRB), and three addressed clinic utilization. A "significance ratio" was constructed which divides the number of positive, statistically-significant findings for an HBM dimension by the total number of studies reporting significance levels for that dimension. Summary results provide substantial empirical support for the HBM, with findings from prospective studies at least as favorable as those obtained from retrospective research. "Perceived barriers" proved to be the most powerful of the HBM dimensions across the various study designs and behaviors. While both were important overall, "perceived susceptibility" was a stronger contributor to understanding PHB than SRB, while the reverse was true for "perceived benefits." "Perceived severity" produced the lowest overall significance ratios; however, while only weakly associated with PHB, this dimension was strongly related to SRB. On the basis of the evidence compiled, it is recommended that consideration of HBM dimensions be a part of health education programming. Suggestions are offered for further research.
          Article 0 comments Cited 736 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Social learning theory and the Health Belief Model.

            Amy Becker, Victor Strecher, I Rosenstock (1987)
            The Health Belief Model, social learning theory (recently relabelled social cognitive theory), self-efficacy, and locus of control have all been applied with varying success to problems of explaining, predicting, and influencing behavior. Yet, there is conceptual confusion among researchers and practitioners about the interrelationships of these theories and variables. This article attempts to show how these explanatory factors may be related, and in so doing, posits a revised explanatory model which incorporates self-efficacy into the Health Belief Model. Specifically, self-efficacy is proposed as a separate independent variable along with the traditional health belief variables of perceived susceptibility, severity, benefits, and barriers. Incentive to behave (health motivation) is also a component of the model. Locus of control is not included explicitly because it is believed to be incorporated within other elements of the model. It is predicted that the new formulation will more fully account for health-related behavior than did earlier formulations, and will suggest more effective behavioral interventions than have hitherto been available to health educators.
            Article 0 comments Cited 209 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The use of theory in health behavior research from 2000 to 2005: a systematic review.

              Darren Mays, Stephanie E Painter, Denise Hynes … (2008)
              Theory-based health behavior change programs are thought to be more effective than those that do not use theory. No previous reviews have assessed the extent to which theory is used (that is, operationalized and tested) in empirical research. The purpose of this study was to describe theory use in recent health behavior literature and to assess the proportion of research that uses theory along a continuum from: informed by theory to applying, testing, or building theory. A sample of empirical research articles (n = 193) published in ten leading public health, medicine, and psychology journals from 2000 to 2005 was coded to determine whether and how theory was used. Of health behavior articles in the sample, 35.7% mentioned theory. The most-often-used theories were The Transtheoretical Model, Social Cognitive Theory, and Health Belief Model. Most theory use (68.1%) involved research that was informed by theory; 18% applied theory; 3.6% tested theory; and 9.4% sought to build theory. About one third of published health behavior research uses theory and a small proportion of those studies rigorously apply theory. Patterns of theory use are similar to reports from the mid-1990s. Behavioral researchers should strive to use theory more thoroughly by applying, testing, and building theories in order to move the field forward.
              Article 0 comments Cited 161 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): J Osteoporos
                Journal ID (publisher-id): JOSTEO
                Title: Journal of Osteoporosis
                Publisher: SAGE-Hindawi Access to Research
                ISSN (Print): 2090-8059
                ISSN (Electronic): 2042-0064
                Publication date (Print): 2011
                Publication date (Electronic): 15 September 2011
                Volume: 2011
                Electronic Location Identifier: 197454
                Affiliations
                1Faculty of Kinesiology and Health Studies, University of Regina, 3737 Wascana Pkwy, Regina, SK, Canada S4S 0A2
                2Saskatchewan Population Health and Evaluation Research Unit, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada S4S 0A2
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: David L. Kendler

                Article
                DOI: 10.4061/2011/197454
                PMC ID: 3175388
                PubMed ID: 21941678
                SO-VID: 2e7fe52d-099b-46fb-8d66-78870c4f1018
                Copyright © Copyright © 2011 K. M. McLeod and C. S. Johnson.
                License:

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Date received : 30 May 2011
                Date accepted : 13 July 2011
                Categories
                Subject: Review Article

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Orthopedics
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Orthopedics

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content517

                See all similar

                Cited by13

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors267

                See all reference authors