↓ Skip to main content

Establishing chronic condition concordance and discordance with diabetes: a Delphi study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Establishing chronic condition concordance and discordance with diabetes: a Delphi study
Published in
BMC Primary Care, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12875-015-0253-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth M Magnan, Rebecca Gittelson, Christie M Bartels, Heather M Johnson, Nancy Pandhi, Elizabeth A Jacobs, Maureen A Smith

Abstract

The vast majority of patients with diabetes have multiple chronic conditions, increasing complexity of care; however, clinical practice guidelines, interventions, and public reporting metrics do not adequately address the interaction of these multiple conditions. To advance the understanding of diabetes clinical care in the context of multiple chronic conditions, we must understand how care overlaps, or doesn't, between diabetes and its co-occurring conditions. This study aimed to determine which chronic conditions are concordant (share care goals with diabetes) and discordant (do not share care goals) with diabetes care, according to primary care provider expert opinion. Using the Delphi technique, we administered an iterative, two-round survey to 16 practicing primary care providers in an academic practice in the Midwestern USA. The expert panel determined which specific diabetes care goals were also care goals for other chronic conditions (concordant) and which were not (discordant). Our diabetes care goals were those commonly used in quality reporting, and the conditions were 62 ambulatory-relevant condition categories. Sixteen experts participated and all completed both rounds. Consensus was reached on the first round for 94% of the items. After the second round, 12 conditions were concordant with diabetes care and 50 were discordant. Of the concordant conditions, 6 overlapped in care for 4 of 5 diabetes care goals and 6 overlapped for 3 of 5 diabetes care goals. Thirty-one discordant conditions did not overlap with any of the diabetes care goals, and 19 overlapped with only 1 or 2 goals. This study significantly adds to the number of conditions for which we have information on concordance and discordance for diabetes care. The results can be used for future studies to assess the impact of concordant and discordant conditions on diabetes care, and may prove useful in developing multimorbidity guidelines and interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 74 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 24 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Social Sciences 6 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 27 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 06 May 2020.
All research outputs
#7,205,295
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#940
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,548
of 278,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#16
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 278,369 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 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 55% of its contemporaries.