Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24938492›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2014

Aligning everyday life priorities with people's self-management support networks: an exploration of the work and implementation of a needs-led telephone support system.

Christian Blickem, Anne Kennedy, Praksha Jariwala, Rebecca Morris, Robert Bowen, Ivaylo Vassilev, Helen Brooks, Tom Blakeman, Anne Rogers

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Capturing patient experience: a qualitative study of implementing real-time feedback in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2016
    Article
  18. Implementation, context and complexity.Implementation science : IS · 2016
    Article
  19. Self-management support from the perspective of patients with a chronic condition: a thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Christian BlickemNIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) Greater Manchester, Centre for Primary Care, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK. christian.blickem@manchester.ac.uk.
Anne Kennedy
Praksha Jariwala
Rebecca Morris
Robert Bowen
Ivaylo Vassilev
Helen Brooks
Tom Blakeman
Anne Rogers

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent initiatives to target the personal, social and clinical needs of people with long-term health conditions have had limited impact within primary care. Evidence of the importance of social networks to support people with long-term conditions points to the need for self-management approaches which align personal circumstances with valued activities. The Patient-Led Assessment for Network Support (PLANS) intervention is a needs-led assessment for patients to prioritise their health and social needs and provide access to local community services and activities. Exploring the work and practices of patients and telephone workers are important for understanding and evaluating the workability and implementation of new interventions.

methodsQualitative methods (interviews, focus group, observations) were used to explore the experience of PLANS from the perspectives of participants and the telephone support workers who delivered it (as part of an RCT) and the reasons why the intervention worked or not. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used as a sensitising tool to evaluate: the relevance of PLANS to patients (coherence); the processes of engagement (cognitive participation); the work done for PLANS to happen (collective action); the perceived benefits and costs of PLANS (reflexive monitoring). 20 patients in the intervention arm of a clinical trial were interviewed and their telephone support calls were recorded and a focus group with 3 telephone support workers was conducted.

resultsAnalysis of the interviews, support calls and focus group identified three themes in relation to the delivery and experience of PLANS. These are: formulation of 'health' in the context of everyday life; trajectories and tipping points: disrupting everyday routines; precarious trust in networks. The relevance of these themes are considered using NPT constructs in terms of the work that is entailed in engaging with PLANS, taking action, and who is implicated this process.

conclusionsPLANS gives scope to align long-term condition management to everyday life priorities and valued aspects of life. This approach can improve engagement with health-relevant practices by situating them within everyday contexts. This has potential to increase utilisation of local resources with potential cost-saving benefits for the NHS.

trial registrationISRCTN45433299.

Indexed as

Self CareSelf-Help GroupsTelephoneAgedFemaleFocus GroupsHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansMaleQualitative ResearchRenal Insufficiency, Chronic

Identifiers

PMID24938492
PMCPMC4071856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.