Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Model for Behavior Change in People With Asthma: Protocol for a Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asthma is a common lung condition that cannot be cured, but it can usually be effectively managed using available treatments. Despite this, it is widely acknowledged that 70% of patients do not adhere to their asthma treatment. Personalizing treatment by providing the most appropriate interventions based on the patient's psychological or behavioral needs produces successful behavior change. However, health care providers have limited available resources to deliver a patient-centered approach for their psychological or behavioral needs, resulting in a current one-size-fits-all strategy due to the nonfeasible nature of existing surveys. The solution would be to provide health care professionals with a clinically feasible questionnaire that identifies the patient's personal psychological and behavioral factors related to adherence. OBJECTIVE: We aim to apply the capability, opportunity, and motivation model of behavior change (COM-B) questionnaire to detect a patient's perceived psychological and behavioral barriers to adherence. Additionally, we aim to explore the key psychological and behavioral barriers indicated by the COM-B questionnaire and adherence to treatment in patients with confirmed asthma with heterogeneous severity. Exploratory objectives will include a focus on the associations between the COM-B questionnaire responses and asthma phenotype, including clinical, biological, psychosocial, and behavioral components. METHODS: In a single visit, participants visiting Portsmouth Hospital's asthma clinic with a diagnosis of asthma will be asked to complete a 20-minute questionnaire on an iPad about their psychological and behavioral barriers following the theoretical domains framework and capability, opportunity, and motivation model. Participants' data are routinely collected, including demographics, asthma characteristics, asthma control, asthma quality of life, and medication regime, which will be recorded on an electronic data capture form. RESULTS: The study is already underway, and it is anticipated that the results will be available by early 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The COM-B asthma study will investigate an easily accessible theory-based tool (a questionnaire) for identifying psychological and behavioral barriers in patients with asthma who are not adhering to their treatment. This will provide useful information on the behavioral barriers to asthma adherence and whether or not a questionnaire can be used to identify these needs. The highlighted barriers will improve health care professionals' knowledge of this important subject, and participants will benefit from the study by removing their barriers. Overall, this will enable health care professionals to use effective individualized interventions to support improved medication adherence while also recognizing and meeting the psychological needs of patients with asthma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05643924; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05643924. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/44710.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.026 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".