↓ Skip to main content

Integrated children’s clinic care (ICCC) versus a self-directed care pathway for children with a chronic health condition: a multi-centre randomised controlled trial study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
207 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
Integrated children’s clinic care (ICCC) versus a self-directed care pathway for children with a chronic health condition: a multi-centre randomised controlled trial study protocol
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12887-018-1034-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thuy Thanh Frakking, John Waugh, Hsien-Jin Teoh, Doug Shelton, Susan Moloney, Donna Ward, Michael David, Matthew Barber, Hannah Carter, Sharon Mickan, Kelly Weir

Abstract

Children with chronic health conditions have better health-related outcomes when their care is managed in a personalised and coordinated way. However, increased demand on Australian ambulatory care hospital services has led to longer waitlist times to access specialists and appropriate intervention services; placing vulnerable children at increased risk of poorer short-term (e.g. social difficulties) and long-term (e.g. convictions) health and social outcomes. Traditional approaches to increasing frequency and service of delivery are expensive and can have minimal impact on caregiver burden. A community based service-integration approach, rather than self-directed care is proposed as increased service linkages are more likely to occur and improve the health outcomes of children with a chronic health condition. An open, unblinded, multi-centre randomised controlled trial in two Australian public hospitals. 112 children (0-16 years) fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be randomised to one of two clinical pathways for management of their chronic health condition: (1) integrated children's care clinic (ICCC) or (2) self-directed care pathway. All children and caregivers will be interviewed at 1 week, and 3, 6 and 12 month time intervals. Primary outcome measures include the Pediatric Quality of Life (PedQOL) questionnaire, Subjective Units of Distress Scale, Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL) and Rotter's Locus of Control Scale. Secondary outcome measures include the total number of medical appointments, school days missed and quantity of services accessed. Our main objectives are to determine if the ICCC results in better health and economics outcomes compared to the self-directed care pathway. The success of a health systems approach needs to be balanced against clinical, mortality and cost-effectiveness data for long-term sustainability within a publicly funded health system. A clinical pathway that is sustainable, cost-effective, provides efficient evidence-based care and improves the quality of life outcomes for children with chronic health conditions has the potential to reduce waitlist times, improve access to health services, increase consumer satisfaction; and prevent costs associated with poorly managed chronic health conditions into adulthood. This study will be the first to provide clinical and health economics data on an integrated care pathway for the management of chronic health conditions in children. On a broader scale, results from this study will help guide care coordination frameworks for children with chronic health conditions; particularly with the introduction and implementation of a National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) across Australia. Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR) ACTRN12617001188325 . Registered: 14th August, 2017.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 207 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 207 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 13%
Student > Bachelor 24 12%
Student > Master 23 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 4%
Other 35 17%
Unknown 76 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 37 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 32 15%
Psychology 17 8%
Social Sciences 9 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 2%
Other 22 11%
Unknown 85 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 11 August 2018.
All research outputs
#3,647,145
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#551
of 3,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,641
of 330,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#17
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,039 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 330,824 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 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.