IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v25y1987i11p1205-1211.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Utility of the health belief model in examining medication compliance among psychiatric outpatients

Author

Listed:
  • Kelly, Gerard R.
  • Mamon, Joyce A.
  • Scott, Jack E.

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between health beliefs and medication compliance among a group of psychiatric outpatients who were prescribed antipsychotic drug regimens. The method of study was an interview with 107 outpatients discharged from two Veterans Administration Medical Centers. The health belief model (HBM) served as an organizing framework to explore the relationships among perceptions of illness severity, susceptibility, benefits and barriers of treatment, cues to action, and medication compliance. The results provide a systematic description of health beliefs reported by psychiatric outpatients. Analyses examine the ability of beliefs to predict compliance and affirm the model's theoretical cogency and appropriateness for use with psychiatric outpatients. Regression analysis showed that 20% of the total variance in compliance could be explained when all components of the HBM were examined together. The study supported the concepts that psychiatric outpatients hold identifiable patterns of health beliefs and attitudes and that the health belief framework functions best when utilized as an integrated model to examine compliance.

Suggested Citation

  • Kelly, Gerard R. & Mamon, Joyce A. & Scott, Jack E., 1987. "Utility of the health belief model in examining medication compliance among psychiatric outpatients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 25(11), pages 1205-1211, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:25:y:1987:i:11:p:1205-1211
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(87)90367-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Corrigan, Patrick W. & Salzer, Mark S., 2003. "The conflict between random assignment and treatment preference: implications for internal validity," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 109-121, May.
    2. Paolo Roma & Merylin Monaro & Laura Muzi & Marco Colasanti & Eleonora Ricci & Silvia Biondi & Christian Napoli & Stefano Ferracuti & Cristina Mazza, 2020. "How to Improve Compliance with Protective Health Measures during the COVID-19 Outbreak: Testing a Moderated Mediation Model and Machine Learning Algorithms," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Lawton, Julia & Peel, Elizabeth & Parry, Odette & Douglas, Margaret, 2008. "Shifting accountability: A longitudinal qualitative study of diabetes causation accounts," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 47-56, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:25:y:1987:i:11:p:1205-1211. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.