↓ Skip to main content

Can Substance Use Disorders be Managed Using the Chronic Care Model? Review and Recommendations from a NIDA Consensus Group

Overview of attention for article published in Public Health Reviews, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 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
Can Substance Use Disorders be Managed Using the Chronic Care Model? Review and Recommendations from a NIDA Consensus Group
Published in
Public Health Reviews, December 2013
DOI 10.1007/bf03391707
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. Thomas McLellan, Joanna L. Starrels, Betty Tai, Adam J. Gordon, Richard Brown, Udi Ghitza, Marc Gourevitch, Jack Stein, Marla Oros, Terry Horton, Robert Lindblad, Jennifer McNeely

Abstract

Brain imaging and genetic studies over the past two decades suggest that substance use disorders are best considered chronic illnesses. The passing of the Affordable Care Act in the United States has set the occasion for integrating treatment of substance use disorders into mainstream healthcare; and for using the proactive, team-oriented Chronic Care Model (CCM). This paper systematically examines and compares whether and how well the CCM could be applied to the treatment of substance use disorders, using type 2 diabetes as a comparator. The chronic illness management approach is still new in the field of addiction and research is limited. However comparative findings suggest that most proactive, team treatment-oriented clinical management practices now used in diabetes management are applicable to the substance use disorders; capable of being implemented by primary care teams; and should offer comparable potential benefits in the treatment of substance use disorders. Such care should also improve the quality of care for many illnesses now negatively affected by unaddressed substance abuse.

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 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 81 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 32%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 5%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 17 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 16 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 20%
Psychology 9 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 21 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 November 2015.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Public Health Reviews
#257
of 278 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#244,777
of 320,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Public Health Reviews
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 278 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 320,102 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.