↓ Skip to main content

What Are Effective Program Characteristics of Self-Management Interventions in Patients With Heart Failure? An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiac Failure, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
85 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
212 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
What Are Effective Program Characteristics of Self-Management Interventions in Patients With Heart Failure? An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis
Published in
Journal of Cardiac Failure, June 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.cardfail.2016.06.422
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nini H. Jonkman, Heleen Westland, Rolf H.H. Groenwold, Susanna Ågren, Manuel Anguita, Lynda Blue, Pieta W.F. Bruggink-André de la Porte, Darren A. DeWalt, Paul L. Hebert, Michele Heisler, Tiny Jaarsma, Gertrudis I.J.M. Kempen, Marcia E. Leventhal, Dirk J.A. Lok, Jan Mårtensson, Javier Muñiz, Haruka Otsu, Frank Peters-Klimm, Michael W. Rich, Barbara Riegel, Anna Strömberg, Ross T. Tsuyuki, Jaap C.A. Trappenburg, Marieke J. Schuurmans, Arno W. Hoes

Abstract

To identify those characteristics of self-management interventions in patients with heart failure (HF) that are effective in influencing health-related quality of life, mortality, and hospitalizations. Randomized trials on self-management interventions conducted between January 1985 and June 2013 were identified and individual patient data were requested for meta-analysis. Generalized mixed effects models and Cox proportional-hazard models including frailty terms were used to assess the relation between characteristics of interventions and health-related outcomes. Twenty randomized trials (5624 patients) were included. Longer intervention duration reduced mortality risk (hazard ratio 0.99, 95%CI 0.97-0.999 per month increase in duration), risk of HF-related hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.98, 95%CI 0.96-0.99), and HF-related hospitalization at 6 months (risk ratio 0.96, 95%CI 0.92-0.995). Although results were not consistent across outcomes, interventions comprising standardized training of interventionists, peer contact, log keeping, or goal-setting skills appeared less effective than interventions without these characteristics. No specific program characteristics were consistently associated with better effects of self-management interventions, but longer duration seemed to improve the effect of self-management interventions on several outcomes. Future research using factorial trial designs and process evaluations is needed to understand the working mechanism of specific program characteristics of self-management interventions in HF patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 212 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 210 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 13%
Researcher 25 12%
Student > Bachelor 18 8%
Student > Postgraduate 16 8%
Other 14 7%
Other 50 24%
Unknown 61 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 54 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 50 24%
Psychology 6 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Unspecified 4 2%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 70 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 July 2016.
All research outputs
#14,474,215
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiac Failure
#1,358
of 2,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,497
of 366,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiac Failure
#15
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,027 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 366,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.