Table 3.
Summary of Theory Coding Scheme application.
| Author | Year | Theory Coding Scheme Item | % Theory applied | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 17 | |||
| Boele | 2018 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 52.6 | ||||||
| Bromberg | 2011 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 47.4 | |||||||
| Conroy | 2018 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 47.4 | |||||||
| Dilorio | 2011 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 42.1 | ||||||||
| Gahari | 2010 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 52.6 | ||||||
| Kannan | 2019 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 36.8 | |||||||||
| Knoop | 2008 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 47.4 | |||||||
| Raina | 2016 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 47.4 | |||||||
| Houlihan | 2017 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 63.2 | ||||
| Janse | 2016 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 63.2 | ||||
| Moss-Morris | 2012 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 57.9 | |||||
| Sajatovic | 2018 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 57.9 | |||||
| Sorbi | 2015 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 52.6 | ||||||
| Thompson | 2019 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 63.2 | ||||
| Tiejen | 2018 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 63.2 | ||||
| Van Kessel | 2016 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 52.6 | ||||||
Item 1: mentioned theory; item 2: mentioned a target construct as the predictor of behaviour; item 3: developed interventions based on a single theory; item 4: screened or selected recipients based on the score or level on a theory-relevant construct/predictor; item 5: used theory to choose or develop intervention techniques; item 6: used theory/predictors to tailor intervention techniques to different recipients; item 7: associated all intervention techniques with at least one theory-relevant construct/predictor; item 8: associated at least one intervention technique with at least one theory-relevant construct/predictor; item 9: linked a cluster of techniques to a cluster of theory-relevant constructs/predictors; item 10: associated all theory-relevant construct/predictors with at least one intervention technique; item 11: associated at least one theoretical construct/predictor with at least one intervention technique; item 12: assessed theory-relevant constructs/predictors; item 13: adopted quality measures; item 14: randomised participants; item 15: identified significant changes in theory-relevant constructs/predictors; item 17: discussed results based on the underpinning theory. Items 16, 18 and 19 were not applied in any study.