Research on causal beliefs about mental illness-the beliefs people hold about what causes a particular mental illness, or mental illnesses in general-is split across a number of theories and disciplines. Although research on this subject has provided a number of insights and practical applications, the diversity of theories, terminology, and keywords makes it challenging for a new reader to gain a comprehensive understanding. We sought to address this by conducting a systematic scoping review of research on causal beliefs. This review included English-language articles from any year that mentioned causal beliefs for mental illness in their title or abstract. We identified articles in two stages. In the first stage, we used a narrow set of search terms referring specifically to causal beliefs (1227 records identified, 417 included). In the second stage, we used a comprehensive set of terms relevant to research on causal beliefs (10,418 records identified, 3838 included). We analyzed articles qualitatively, organizing them into one of five theories or categories: the common-sense model of self-regulation, explanatory models, mental health literacy, biogenetic causal beliefs, and other research on causal beliefs. We provide a comprehensive summary of these literatures in terms of their history, typical research questions and study design, findings, and practical applications. These theories differ in their theoretical orientation towards causal beliefs, research methods, findings, and applications. However, they broadly share a view of causal beliefs as multifaceted, culturally determined, and relevant for additional psychosocial variables such as mental illness stigma and help-seeking. We conclude by making recommendations for researchers, clinicians, public health messaging, and for individuals with mental illness.

This systematic review answered two questions among adults with chronic conditions: When included in the same statistical model, are Common Sense Model constructs and self-efficacy both associated with (1) self-management behaviors and (2) health outcomes? We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and included 29 articles. When included in the same statistical model, Common Sense Model constructs and self-efficacy were both correlated with outcomes. Self-efficacy was more consistently associated with self-management behaviors, and Common Sense Model constructs were more consistently associated with health outcomes. Findings support the continued inclusion and integration of both frameworks to understand and/or improve chronic illness self-management and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether people\'s beliefs about their illness, conceptualised by the common sense model (CSM), can prospectively predict adherence to self-management behaviours (including, attendance, medication, diet and exercise) in adults with acute and chronic physical illnesses.
METHODS: Electronic databases were searched in September 2014, for papers specifying the use of the \'CSM\' in relation to \'self-management\', \'rehabilitation\' and \'adherence\' in the context of physical illness. Six hundred abstracts emerged. Data from 52 relevant studies were extracted. Twenty-one studies were meta-analysed, using correlation coefficients in random effects models. The remainder were descriptively synthesised.
RESULTS: The effect sizes for individual illness belief domains and adherence to self-management behaviours ranged from .04 to .13, indicating very weak, predictive relationships. Further analysis revealed that predictive relationships did not differ by the: type of self-management behaviour; acute or chronic illness; or duration of follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Individual illness belief domains, outlined by the CSM, did not predict adherence to self-management behaviours in adults with physical illnesses. Prospective relationships, controlling for past behaviour, also did not emerge. Other factors, including patients\' treatment beliefs and inter-relationships between individual illness beliefs domains, may have influenced potential associations with adherence to self-management behaviours.