↓ Skip to main content

The CARE Plus study – a whole-system intervention to improve quality of life of primary care patients with multimorbidity in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation: exploratory cluster randomised…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
4 policy sources
twitter
100 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 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
The CARE Plus study – a whole-system intervention to improve quality of life of primary care patients with multimorbidity in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation: exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial and cost-utility analysis
Published in
BMC Medicine, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12916-016-0634-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stewart W. Mercer, Bridie Fitzpatrick, Bruce Guthrie, Elisabeth Fenwick, Eleanor Grieve, Kenny Lawson, Nicki Boyer, Alex McConnachie, Suzanne M. Lloyd, Rosaleen O’Brien, Graham C. M. Watt, Sally Wyke

Abstract

Multimorbidity is common in deprived communities and reduces quality of life. Our aim was to evaluate a whole-system primary care-based complex intervention, called CARE Plus, to improve quality of life in multimorbid patients living in areas of very high deprivation. We used a phase 2 exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial with eight general practices in Glasgow in very deprived areas that involved multimorbid patients aged 30-65 years. The intervention comprised structured longer consultations, relationship continuity, practitioner support, and self-management support. Control practices continued treatment as usual. Primary outcomes were quality of life (EQ-5D-5L utility scores) and well-being (W-BQ12; 3 domains). Cost-effectiveness from a health service perspective, engagement, and retention were assessed. Recruitment and baseline measurements occurred prior to randomisation. Blinding post-randomisation was not possible but outcome measurement and analysis were masked. Analyses were by intention to treat. Of 76 eligible practices contacted, 12 accepted, and eight were selected, randomised and participated for the duration of the trial. Of 225 eligible patients, 152 (68 %) participated and 67/76 (88 %) in each arm completed the 12-month assessment. Two patients died in the control group. CARE Plus significantly improved one domain of well-being (negative well-being), with an effect size of 0.33 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.11-0.55) at 12 months (p = 0.0036). Positive well-being, energy, and general well-being (the combined score of the three components) were not significantly influenced by the intervention at 12 months. EQ-5D-5L area under the curve over the 12 months was higher in the CARE Plus group (p = 0.002). The incremental cost in the CARE Plus group was £929 (95 % CI: £86-£1788) per participant with a gain in quality-adjusted life years of 0.076 (95 % CI: 0.028-0.124) over the 12 months of the trial, resulting in a cost-effectiveness ratio of £12,224 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Modelling suggested that cost-effectiveness would continue. It is feasible to conduct a high-quality cluster randomised control trial of a complex intervention with multimorbid patients in primary care in areas of very high deprivation. Enhancing primary care through a whole-system approach may be a cost-effective way to protect quality of life for multimorbid patients in deprived areas. ISRCTN 34092919 , assigned 14/1/2013.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 100 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 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 183 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 34 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 14%
Student > Master 21 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 10%
Student > Bachelor 16 9%
Other 31 17%
Unknown 38 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 62 34%
Psychology 22 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 9%
Social Sciences 12 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 15 8%
Unknown 53 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 125. 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 20 August 2021.
All research outputs
#211,297
of 18,912,409 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#180
of 2,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,292
of 271,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,912,409 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,836 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 271,210 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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