A Systematic Review of the Instruments Used for Evaluating Causal Beliefs and Perceived Heart Risk Factors

• Main Authors: Mozhgan Saeidi, Saeid Komasi, Angelo Compare
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2020-07-01
• Series: Journal of Tehran University Heart Center
• Subjects: Awareness; Cardiovascular diseases; ; Causality; Risk factors
• Online Access: https://jthc.tums.ac.ir/index.php/jthc/article/view/877

Background: The etiologies and causal beliefs of heart disease are considered one of the 5 dimensions of health self-regulatory model. Thus, the present study aimed to review the literature and screen the appropriate tools for evaluating the causal beliefs and perceived heart risk factors (PHRFs). Methods: The review samples encompassed all published articles from 1992 to March 2017. A systematic search was conducted across 6 databases: the Web of Science, Scopus, Medline, EBSCO, ProQuest, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar. The qualitative evaluation of the articles was examined using the checklists of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) by 2 independent investigators. After the application of the criteria for inclusion in the study, 22 studies were obtained according to the PRISMA guidelines. Results: A total of 10 504 (50.5% male) patients at an average age of 57.85±10.75 years participated in 22 studies under review. The results of the systematic review showed that 22 tools were available to measure PHRFs. The instruments were categorized into 4 groups of valid scales (6 studies), invalid questionnaires (6 studies), checklists (3 studies), and open-ended single items (7 studies). Only 23.2% of the measuring instruments were sufficiently valid. Conclusion: The results of this systematic review showed that a limited number of valid tools were available to measure PHRFs. Considering the importance of studying cardiac patients’ perception of the etiology of disease and the paucity of standards and valid grading scales, it seems necessary to design and provide tools with broader content that can cover all aspects of patients’ beliefs.