↓ 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 (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
272 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 272 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%
Canada 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 261 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 16%
Researcher 40 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 27 10%
Student > Bachelor 21 8%
Other 60 22%
Unknown 42 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 82 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 49 18%
Psychology 28 10%
Social Sciences 20 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 3%
Other 30 11%
Unknown 56 21%

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
#4,478,057
of 17,780,770 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,936
of 6,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,462
of 257,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,780,770 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 6,024 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 257,838 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them