Toolkits to Support Health Care Providers in Health Behavior Change for Patients With Chronic Conditions: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND Health care providers (HCPs) are key agents in supporting health behavior (eg, smoking and physical activity) change in patients. Toolkits have previously been used to guide HCPs in care and have shown effectiveness in improving clinical outcomes. However, there is a lack of understanding of how toolkits should be developed to best support HCPs. OBJECTIVE This scoping review aimed to map the existing literature on the theories, models, frameworks, approaches, and methods that have been used in the development of toolkits to support HCPs in health behavior change. METHODS Five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched from inception to August 2026. Original research articles published in peer-reviewed academic journals in English from any geographic area describing the development of a toolkit to support HCPs in health behavior change for patients with chronic conditions were included. Qualitative data were analyzed using conventional content analysis and quantitative data were examined in tabular terms, with a simple descriptive synthesis of the findings. Barriers and facilitators identified from studies were deductively coded using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and reported according to TDF domains identified in studies. RESULTS Nineteen articles met inclusion criteria. The articles included toolkits addressing several health behaviors, including physical activity (n=16), nutrition (n=6), sedentary behavior (n=2), sleep (n=2), and weight management more broadly (n=2). Toolkit formats (eg, use of videos and written components) varied greatly between studies. All studies included knowledge users in the development of the toolkit. Use of a theory, model, or framework was described in 14 studies, and barriers and facilitators to HCP promotion of health behavior change were examined in 14 studies. The most frequently reported TDF domain was environmental context and resources, with time as the most frequently cited barrier. Toolkit development typically consisted of an exploratory phase to determine knowledge users’ needs and wants, toolkit development, dissemination, and evaluation. CONCLUSIONS Toolkits varied greatly in format and development process but generally involved iterative development based on feedback from knowledge users. However, no toolkits targeted smoking, alcohol use, or recreational drug use, which warrant further study. To assist future investigators looking to develop a toolkit for health behavior change, we present a definition of a toolkit and a series of recommendations for toolkit design and development. Although previous reviews have mapped the existence of various toolkits, they have not examined how these have been developed. This review provides a novel description of this development and a guide for the development of future toolkits to increase uptake of toolkits and reduce the knowledge-to-practice gap. Additionally, this review defines the term “toolkit” and identifies its minimum components, which can be used by researchers to classify and compare toolkits in the future. CLINICALTRIAL OSF Registries osf.io/bstmy; https://osf.io/bstmy/overview