↓ Skip to main content

Case management and self-management support for frequent users with chronic disease in primary care: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
333 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
Case management and self-management support for frequent users with chronic disease in primary care: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-13-49
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maud-Christine Chouinard, Catherine Hudon, Marie-France Dubois, Pasquale Roberge, Christine Loignon, Éric Tchouaket, Martin Fortin, Éva-Marjorie Couture, Maxime Sasseville

Abstract

Chronic diseases represent a major challenge for health care and social services. A number of people with chronic diseases require more services due to characteristics that increase their vulnerability. Given the burden of increasingly vulnerable patients on primary care, a pragmatic intervention in four Family Medicine Groups (primary care practices in Quebec, Canada) has been proposed for individuals with chronic diseases (diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory diseases, musculoskeletal diseases and/or chronic pain) who are frequent users of hospital services. The intervention combines case management by a nurse with group support meetings encouraging self-management based on the Stanford Chronic Disease Self-Management Program. The goals of this study are to: (1) analyze the implementation of the intervention in the participating practices in order to determine how the various contexts have influenced the implementation and the observed effects; (2) evaluate the proximal (self-efficacy, self-management, health habits, activation and psychological distress) and intermediate (empowerment, quality of life and health care use) effects of the intervention on patients; (3) conduct an economic analysis of the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the intervention.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 333 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 5 2%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 322 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 51 15%
Researcher 42 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 30 9%
Student > Bachelor 25 8%
Other 71 21%
Unknown 73 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 87 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 63 19%
Psychology 29 9%
Social Sciences 23 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 2%
Other 36 11%
Unknown 87 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 01 April 2015.
All research outputs
#5,691,086
of 22,696,971 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,510
of 7,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,421
of 282,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#33
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,696,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,590 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 282,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.