论文已发表
注册即可获取德孚的最新动态
IF 收录期刊
理论领域框架:2005-2023年的文献计量和可视化分析
Authors Zhou Y, Huang Y, Wang Y, Xu X, Yu Z, Gu Y
Received 17 April 2024
Accepted for publication 18 July 2024
Published 20 August 2024 Volume 2024:17 Pages 4055—4069
DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S470223
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Scott Fraser
Yiwen Zhou,1,* Yuyan Huang,1,* Yingwen Wang,2 Xiaofeng Xu,1 Zhuowen Yu,1 Ying Gu3
1Department of Gastroenterology, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University, National Children’s Medical Center, Shanghai, 201102, People’s Republic of China; 2Centre for Clinical Practice Guideline Production and Evaluation, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University, National Children’s Medical Center, Shanghai, 201102, People’s Republic of China; 3Nursing Department, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University, National Children’s Medical Center, Shanghai, 201102, People’s Republic of China
*These authors contributed equally to this work
Correspondence: Ying Gu, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University, National Children’s Medical Center, Shanghai, 201102, People’s Republic of China, Email guying0128@aliyun.com Zhuowen Yu, Department of Gastroenterology, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University, National Children’s Medical Center, Shanghai, 201102, People’s Republic of China, Email yzw100@126.com
Background: The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) is among the most extensively utilised foundational frameworks in implementation science. It was developed from 33 psychological theories, with the latest version identifying 14 domains encompassing 84 theoretical constructs. These domains and constructs capture the complexity of factors that affect behaviours, making the framework a valuable tool for designing and implementing interventions within health and social care settings.
Objective: To summarise the development, hot topics, and future trends in TDF-related research and provide implementation practitioners with more information on the application of TDF.
Methods: We used TDF as the topic and searched the ISI Web of Science Core Collection, identifying 1382 relevant publications. We used analytical tools such as Excel, Tableau, VOSviewer, and Citespace to conduct a bibliometric analysis of the relevant publication.
Results: We identified the United Kingdom as the primary contributor, with University College London as the key institution. Susan Michie ranked highest in total citations. The analysis highlighted cancer and stroke as primary clinic medicine-related topics using TDF. Emerging themes encompass abuse, violence, maternal health, antenatal care, patient involvement, and trauma-informed care et al. “Nurse” and “qualitative research” emerged as recent and enduring hotspots, possibly indicating future research trends.
Conclusion: This article represents the first attempt to summarise the TDF using bibliometric analysis. We suggest this method can be used to analyse other theoretical frameworks in scientific implementation of its objectivity and quantifiability. Overall, the application scope of TDF is shifting from public health towards more specialised clinical directions, although its application in the field of public health is continuously expanding. In the future, the number of users of TDF is also expected to expand from implementation scientists to professional technical personnel.
Keywords: theoretical domains framework, bibliometric analysis, visualization, implementation science