ArticlePatient preference and adherence2010
Primary care patient and provider preferences for diabetes care managers.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying patient preferences for diabetes care: A protocol for implementing a discrete choice experiment in Samoa.PloS one · 2023Article
- Provider perspectives on essential functions for care management in the collaborative treatment of hypertension: the P.A.R.T.N.E.R. framework.Journal of general internal medicine · 2015Article
- Convergences and divergences of diabetic patients' and healthcare professionals' opinions of care: a qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2015Article
- National standards for diabetes self-management education and support.Diabetes care · 2014Article
- National standards for diabetes self-management education and support.Diabetes care · 2013Article
- National standards for diabetes self-management education and support.Diabetes care · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe collaborative care model, using care managers, has been shown to be effective in achieving sustained treatment outcomes in chronic disease management. Little effort has been made to find out patient preferences for chronic disease care, hence, we conducted a study aimed at identifying these.
methodsA 20-item questionnaire, asking for patients' and providers' preferences and perceptions, was mailed out to 1000 randomly selected patients in Olmsted County, Minnesota, identified through a diabetes registry to have type 2 diabetes mellitus, a prototypical prevalent chronic disease. Surveys were also sent to 42 primary care providers.
resultsThere were 254 (25.4%) patient responders and 28 (66%) provider responders. The majority of patients (>70%) and providers (89%) expressed willingness to have various aspects of diabetes care managed by a care manager. Although 75% of providers would be comfortable expanding the care manager role to other chronic diseases, only 39.5% of patient responders would be willing to see a care manager for other chronic problems. Longer length of time from initial diagnosis of diabetes was associated with decreased patient likelihood to work with a care manager.
conclusionDespite study limitations, such as the lack of validated measures to assess perceptions related to care management, our results suggest that patients and providers are willing to collaborate with a care manager and that both groups have similar role expectations of a care manager.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.