Creencias en salud: historia, constructos y aportes del modelo

Authors

  • Gustavo Cabrera A Universidad de Antioquia
  • Jorge Tascón G
  • Diego Lucumí C

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rfnsp.906

Keywords:

Health beliefs, theory, models, prevention, promotion

Abstract

In academical and professional context, sound theoretical and conceptual basis are fundamental for approaching to reality through research or planned interventions. A group of social psychologists working for the United States Public Health Service, developed in the 50’s the Health Belief Model HBM, to explain the
widespread lack of people’s participation in preventive and detecting diseases programs. It have been one the most influential and widely used models to explain preventive actions, people’s responses to symptoms, disease diagnosed and health related behaviors. This paper presents main aspects related to the HBM,
including arguments for using models and theoretical basis on health research, its history, components and use of the model highlighting its contributions on research, prevention and health promotion interventions.
|Abstract
= 7388 veces | PDF (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))
= 4233 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Gustavo Cabrera A, Universidad de Antioquia

Profesor Facultad Nacional de Salud Pública

References

(1). Green L. Models in health education. In:Matarazzo J, Weiss S, Herd A, Miller N, Weis S(editors). Behavioral health: a handbook forhealth enhancement and disease prevention.New York: Wiley; 1984.

(2). Downie R, Fife C, Tannahill A. Healthpromotion: models and values. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press; 1996.

(3). Glanz K, Rimer B, Lewis F. Health behaviourand health education: theory, research andpractice. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Jossey Bass; 1997.

(4). Cabrera G. Transteoría e análise estratégicano controle local do tabagismo, Zarzal-Colombia, 1999. São Paulo; 1999. [Tese de doutorado-Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidadede São Paulo].

(5). Seedhouse D. Health promotion: philosophy,prejudice and practice. New York: Wiley; 1997.

(6). Nutbeam D, Harris E. Theory in a nutshell: apractitioner’s guide to community used theoriesand models in health promotion. Sydney:National Centre for Health Promotion; 1998.

(7). Roles and uses of theory in health educationpractice [Editorial]. Health Education Quarterly1992; 19(3). Special issue.

(8). Coombes Y, McPherson K. Review of modelsof health-related behavior change. London:Health promotion sciences unit, London Schoolof Hygiene and tropical medicine; 1996.

(9). Katz J, Peberdy A (editors). Promoting health:knowledge and practice. London: Macmillan; 1997. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25430-9

(10). Lewin K. A dynamic theory of personality.New York: McGraw-Hill; 1935.

(11). Lewin K. The nature of field theory. In: MarxMH (editor). Psychological theory. New York:Macmillan; 1951.

(12). Organización Panamericana de la Salud.La aplicación de teorías y técnicas de las cien-cias sociales a la promoción de la salud. RevistaPanamericana de Salud Pública 1998;4:142-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1020-49891998000800017

(13). Nyswander D. The open society: implicationesfor health education. Health Education Monthly,1967;22:3-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109019816700102201

(14). Earp J, Ennett S. Conceptual models forhealth education research and practice. HealthEducation Research 1991;6:163-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/her/6.2.163

(15). Van Ryn M, Heaney C. What’s the use oftheory? Health Education Quarterly1992;19(3):315-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109019819201900304

(16). Tones K, Tilford S. Health education:effectiveness, efficiency and equity. 2nd ed.London: Chapman Hall; 1994.

(17). Marx M, Hillix M, (editors). Sistemas e teoríasem psicología. 2 nd ed. São Paulo: Cultrix; 1995.

(18). Naidoo J, Wills J. Health promotion: foundationsfor practice. London: Bailliere Tindal; 1996.

(19). Kar S (editor). Health promotion indicatorsand actions. New York: Springer; 1989.

(20). Candeias N. Conceitos de educaçao epromoçao em saude: mudanças individuais emudanças organizacionais. Rev. Saúde Públi-ca 1997;3:209-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-89101997000200016

(21). Cabrera G, Candeias N. El modelo de aná-lisis estratégico para promoción de la salud y elcontrol local del tabaquismo. Revista FacultadNacional de Salud Pública 1999;17(1):9-16.

(22). Cabrera G. El modelo transteórico del comportamiento en salud. Revista Facultad Nacio-nal de Salud Pública 2000;18(2):129-138.

(23). Antonovsky A. The salutogenic model astheory to guide health promotion. HealthPromotion International 1996;11:11-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/11.1.11

(24). Kerlinger F. Behavioral research: a concep-tual approach. New York: Holt, Rinehart andWiston; 1979.

(25). Green L (editorial). The health belief modeland personal health behavior. Health EducationMonographs 1974;2(4):324-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109019817400200401

(26). Kasl S, Cobb S. Health behavior, illnessbehavior and sick-role behavior. ArchivesEnvironmental Health 1966;12:246-66, 534-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00039896.1966.10664365

(27). Hochbaum G. Public participation in medicalscreening programs: a socio-psychologicalstudy. Public Health Service Publication N°. 572.Washington, D.C.: US Government printingoffice, 1958.

(28). Hochbaum G. Health behavior: basicconcepts. National center for health servicesresearch and development. Belmont, CA:Wadsworth publishing Co; 1970.

(29). Rosenstock I, Derryberry M, Carriger B. Whypeople fail to seek poliomyelitis vaccination.Public Health Reports 1959;74:98-103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/4590386

(30). Rosenstock I, Hochbaum G, Kegeles S.Determinants of health behavior. WashingtonDC: White house conference on children andyouth; 1960.

(31). Rosenstock I. What research in motivationsuggests for public health. American Journal ofPublic Health 1960;50:295-302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.50.3_Pt_1.295

(32). Rosenstock I. Why people use healthservices. Milbank Memory Fund Quarterly1966;44:94-127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3348967

(33). Rosenstock I. Historical origins of the healthbelief model. Health Education Monographs1974;2(4):328-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109019817400200403

(34). Becker M, (introduction). The health beliefmodel and personal health behavior. HealthEducation Monographs 1974;2(4):326-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109019817400200402

(35). Kirstch J, Haefner D, Kegeles S, RosenstockI. A national study of health beliefs. JournalHuman Behavior 1966;7:242-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2948771

(36). Rotter J. Social learning and clinicalpsychology. New York: Prentice Hall; 1954. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/10788-000

(37). Edwards W. The theory of decision making.Psychological Bulletin 1954;51:380-417. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0053870

(38). Tolman E. Principles of performance.Psychological Review 1955;62:315-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0049079

(39). Atkinson J. Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological Review1957;64:359-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043445

(40). Feather N. Subjective probability anddecision under uncertainty. PsychologicalReview 1959;66:150-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045692

(41). Prentice-Dunn S, Rogers R. Protectionmotivation theory and preventive health: beyondthe health belief model. Health Educationresearch: theory and practice 1986;1(3):153-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/her/1.3.153

(42). Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifyingtheory of behavior change. PsychologicalReview 1977;84:191-215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.84.2.191

(43). Bandura A. Self-efficacy in changingsocieties. New York: Cambridge University, 1995. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527692

(44). Janz N, Becker M. The health belief model: adecade later. Health education Quarterly1984;11:1-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109019818401100101

Downloads

Published

2009-03-09

How to Cite

1.
Cabrera A G, Tascón G J, Lucumí C D. Creencias en salud: historia, constructos y aportes del modelo. Rev. Fac. Nac. Salud Pública [Internet]. 2009 Mar. 9 [cited 2025 Feb. 5];19(1). Available from: https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/fnsp/article/view/906

Issue

Vol. 19 No. 1 (2001)

Section

Revisión sistemática

License

The contents of the articles are the responsibility of the authors

The editorial committee has editorial independence from the National School of Public Health "Héctor Abad Gómez" of the University of Antioquia.

The editorial committee is not responsible for aspects related to copying, plagiarism or fraud that may appear in the articles published in it.

When you are going to reproduce and disclose photographs or personal data in printed or digital format, informed consent is required. Therefore, this requirement is required of the author at the time of receipt of the manuscript.

Authors are responsible for obtaining the necessary permissions to reproduce any material protected by reproduction rights.

The authors preserve the moral rights and assign the economic rights that will correspond to the University of Antioquia, to publish it, distribute electronic copies, include them in indexing services, directories or national and international databases in Open Access, under the Creative Commons Attribution license -Not Commercial-Share Equal 4.0 International Commercial (CC BY-NC-SA) which allows others to distribute, remix, retouch, and create from the work in a non-commercial way, as long as the respective credit and license are granted. new creations under the same conditions.

The authors will sign the declaration of transfer of economic rights to the University of Antioquia, after the acceptance of the manuscript.

The editorial committee reserves the right to reject the articles whose authors do not offer satisfactory explanations about the contribution of each author, to meet the criteria of authorship in the submission letter. All authors must meet the four criteria of authorship according to ICMJE: "a) .- That there is a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the article or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of the data. b) That they have participated in the design of the research work or in the critical review of its intellectual content. c) .- That has been intervened in the approval of the final version that will be published.d). That they have the capacity to respond to all aspects of the article in order to ensure that issues related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are adequately investigated and resolved. "

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC