Development of a general internet attitude scale and internet self-efficacy scale

The measurement of users’ attitudes towards and confidence with using the Internet is an important yet poorly researched topic. Previous research has encountered issues that serve to obfuscate rather than clarify. Such issues include a lack of distinction between the terms ‘attitude’ and ‘self-efficacy’, the absence of a theoretical framework to measure each concept, and failure to follow well-established techniques for the measurement of both attitude and self-efficacy. Thus, the primary aim of this research was to develop two statistically reliable scales which independently measure attitudes towards the Internet and Internet self-efficacy. This research addressed the outlined issues by applying appropriate theoretical frameworks to each of the constructs under investigation. First, the well-known three component (affect, behaviour, cognition) model of attitudes was applied to previous Internet attitude statements. The scale was distributed to four large samples of participants. Exploratory factor analyses revealed four underlying factors in the scale: Internet Affect, Internet Exhilaration, Social Benefit of the Internet and Internet Detriment. The final scale contains 21 items, demonstrates excellent reliability and achieved excellent model fit in the confirmatory factor analysis. Second, Bandura’s (1997) model of self-efficacy was followed to develop a reliable measure of Internet self-efficacy. Data collected as part of this research suggests that there are ten main activities which individuals can carry out on the Internet. Preliminary analyses suggested that self-efficacy is confounded with previous experience; thus, individuals were invited to indicate how frequently they performed the listed Internet tasks in addition to rating their feelings of self-efficacy for each task. The scale was distributed to a sample of 841 participants. Results from the analyses suggest that the more frequently an individual performs an activity on the Internet, the higher their self-efficacy score for that activity. This suggests that frequency of use ought to be taken into account in individual’s self-efficacy scores to obtain a ‘true’ self-efficacy score for the individual. Thus, a formula was devised to incorporate participants’ previous experience of Internet tasks in their Internet self-efficacy scores. This formula was then used to obtain an overall Internet self-efficacy score for participants. Following the development of both scales, gender and age differences were explored in Internet attitudes and Internet self-efficacy scores. The analyses indicated that there were no gender differences between groups for Internet attitude or Internet self-efficacy scores. However, age group differences were identified for both attitudes and self-efficacy. Individuals aged 25-34 years achieved the highest scores on both the Internet attitude and Internet self-efficacy measures. Internet attitude and self-efficacy scores tended to decrease with age with older participants achieving lower scores on both measures than younger participants. It was also found that the more exposure individuals had to the Internet, the higher their Internet attitude and Internet self-efficacy scores. Examination of the relationship between attitude and self-efficacy found a significantly positive relationship between the two measures suggesting that the two constructs are related. Implication of such findings and directions for future research are outlined in detail in the Discussion section of this thesis.

The knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of patients and their healthcare professionals around oral dosage form modification: a systematic review of the qualitative literature

Objectives: The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize the available qualitative evidence on the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of adult patients, healthcare professionals and carers about oral dosage form modification. Design: A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative studies was undertaken, utilising the thematic synthesis approach. Data sources: The following databases were searched from inception to September 2015: PubMed, Medline (EBSCO), EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, ProQuest Databases, Scopus, Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). Citation tracking and searching the references lists of included studies was also undertaken. Grey literature was searched using the OpenGrey database, internet searching and personal knowledge. An updated search was undertaken in June 2016. Review methods: Studies meeting the following criteria were eligible for inclusion; (i) used qualitative data collection and analysis methods; (ii) full-text was available in English; (iii) included adult patients who require oral dosage forms to be modified to meet their needs or; (iv) carers or healthcare professionals of patients who require oral dosage forms to be modified. Two reviewers independently appraised the quality of the included studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklist. A thematic synthesis was conducted and analytical themes were generated. Results: Of 5455 records screened, seven studies were eligible for inclusion; three involved healthcare professionals and the remaining four studies involved patients. Four analytical themes emerged from the thematic synthesis: (i) patient-centred individuality and variability; (ii) communication; (iii) knowledge and uncertainty and; (iv) complexity. The variability of individual patient’s requirements, poor communication practices and lack of knowledge about oral dosage form modification, when combined with the complex and multi-faceted healthcare environment complicate decision making regarding oral dosage form modification and administration. Conclusions: This systematic review has highlighted the key factors influencing the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs of patients and healthcare professionals about oral dosage form modifications. The findings suggest that in order to optimise oral medicine modification practices the needs of individual patients should be routinely and systematically assessed and decision-making should be supported by evidence based recommendations with multidisciplinary input. Further research is needed to optimise oral dosage form modification practices and the factors identified in this review should be considered in the development of future interventions.