Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17925140›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2007

Supporting self-care in general practice.

Colin J Greaves, John L Campbell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Self-care research: Where are we now? Where are we going?International journal of nursing studies · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Colin J GreavesPeninsula Medical School, Primary Care Research Group, Exeter. Colin.Greaves@pms.ac.uk
John L Campbell

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is both a clear need and a political will to improve self-care in long-term conditions: demand for self-care support interventions is rising. This article discusses current approaches to supporting self-care in primary care, evidence in favour of self-care support, and issues for GPs to consider in planning self-care support systems. In planning care pathways, important choices need to be made about whether to use individual or group-based approaches and what intensity of intervention is appropriate to match patient needs. Investment may also be needed in both health professional competences and practice systems to optimise their ability to support patient self-care. Self-care support is a key approach for the future of UK health care. Practices that are well trained and well organised to support self-care will respond better to the complex challenges of achieving improvements in the outcomes of long-term conditions.

Indexed as

Patient ParticipationDecision MakingFamily PracticeHumansPatient Care PlanningPatient-Centered CarePhysician-Patient RelationsQuality of Health CareSelf CareSocial Support

Identifiers

PMID17925140
PMCPMC2151815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.