↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of care management interventions targeting multimorbidity and high care utilization

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
156 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
A systematic review of care management interventions targeting multimorbidity and high care utilization
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-2881-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer M. Baker, Richard W. Grant, Anjali Gopalan

Abstract

Evidence supporting the effectiveness of care management programs for complex patients has been inconclusive. However, past reviews have not focused on complexity primarily defined by multimorbidity and healthcare utilization. We conducted a systematic review of care management interventions targeting the following three patient groups: adults with two or more chronic medical conditions, adults with at least one chronic medical condition and concurrent depression, and adults identified based solely on high past or predicted healthcare utilization. Eligible studies were identified from PubMed, published between 06/01/2005 and 05/31/2015, and reported findings from a randomized intervention that tested a comprehensive, care management intervention. Identified interventions were grouped based on the three "complex" categories of interest (described above). Two investigators extracted data using a structured abstraction form and assessed RCT quality. We screened 989 article titles for eligibility from which 847 were excluded. After reviewing the remaining 142 abstracts, 83 articles were excluded. We reviewed the full-text of 59 full-text articles and identified 15 unique RCTs for the final analysis. Of these 15 studies, two focused on patients with two or more chronic medical conditions, seven on patients with at least one chronic medical condition and depression, and six on patients with high past or predicted healthcare utilization. Measured outcomes included utilization, chronic disease measures, and patient-reported outcomes. The seven studies targeting patients with at least one chronic medical condition and depression demonstrated significant improvement in depression symptoms (ranging from 9.2 to 48.7% improvement). Of the six studies that focused on high utilizers, two showed small reductions in utilization. The quality of the research methodology in most of the studies (12/15) was rated fair or poor. Interventions were more likely to be successful when patients were selected based on having at least one chronic medical condition and concurrent depression, and when patient-reported outcomes were assessed. Future research should focus on the role of mental health in complex care management, finding better methods for identifying patients who would benefit most from care management, and determining which intervention components are needed for which patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 156 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 10%
Student > Master 16 10%
Other 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 34 22%
Unknown 42 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 11%
Social Sciences 14 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Psychology 5 3%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 50 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 12 July 2023.
All research outputs
#2,740,180
of 24,593,959 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,172
of 8,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,653
of 449,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#40
of 174 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,593,959 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,310 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 449,852 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 174 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.