| Title |
Effectiveness of chronic care models: opportunities for improving healthcare practice and health outcomes: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-015-0854-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carol Davy, Jonathan Bleasel, Hueiming Liu, Maria Tchan, Sharon Ponniah, Alex Brown |
| Abstract |
The increasing prevalence of chronic disease and even multiple chronic diseases faced by both developed and developing countries is of considerable concern. Many of the interventions to address this within primary healthcare settings are based on a chronic care model first developed by MacColl Institute for Healthcare Innovation at Group Health Cooperative. This systematic literature review aimed to identify and synthesise international evidence on the effectiveness of elements that have been included in a chronic care model for improving healthcare practices and health outcomes within primary healthcare settings. The review broadens the work of other similar reviews by focusing on effectiveness of healthcare practice as well as health outcomes associated with implementing a chronic care model. In addition, relevant case series and case studies were also included. Of the 77 papers which met the inclusion criteria, all but two reported improvements to healthcare practice or health outcomes for people living with chronic disease. While the most commonly used elements of a chronic care model were self-management support and delivery system design, there were considerable variations between studies regarding what combination of elements were included as well as the way in which chronic care model elements were implemented. This meant that it was impossible to clearly identify any optimal combination of chronic care model elements that led to the reported improvements. While the main argument for excluding papers reporting case studies and case series in systematic literature reviews is that they are not of sufficient quality or generalizability, we found that they provided a more detailed account of how various chronic care models were developed and implemented. In particular, these papers suggested that several factors including supporting reflective healthcare practice, sending clear messages about the importance of chronic disease care and ensuring that leaders support the implementation and sustainability of interventions may have been just as important as a chronic care model's elements in contributing to the improvements in healthcare practice or health outcomes for people living with chronic disease. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 10% |
| Canada | 2 | 10% |
| France | 1 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Mexico | 1 | 5% |
| India | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| El Salvador | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 10% |
| Scientists | 2 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 514 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 511 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 74 | 14% |
| Researcher | 55 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 54 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 49 | 10% |
| Other | 36 | 7% |
| Other | 112 | 22% |
| Unknown | 134 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 143 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 103 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 26 | 5% |
| Psychology | 20 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 11 | 2% |
| Other | 70 | 14% |
| Unknown | 141 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 April 2024.
All research outputs
#2,093,136
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#762
of 8,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,852
of 282,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#11
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 282,462 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.