Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25164529›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2014

Self-management support interventions to reduce health care utilisation without compromising outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Maria Panagioti, Gerry Richardson, Nicola Small, Elizabeth Murray, Anne Rogers, Anne Kennedy, Stanton Newman, Peter Bower

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 141 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
141citing papers in PubMed, 13 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.

NCT03972332 completednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Pain Experience in Individuals With Chronic Low Back Pain: a Cohort Study

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of NottinghamRan2018 to 2020Enrolled97ConditionsLow Back PainArmsQuantitative Sensory Testing
NCT06623006 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Self Management of Type 2 Diabetes Using a Co-designed Mobile Health (Mhealth) Intervention in Nepal: A Randomized Control Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of HuddersfieldRan2025 to 2026Enrolled154ConditionsType 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM)Armsmobile health (mhealth)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

141 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

81 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors.

Maria PanagiotiSchool for Primary Care Research, Centre for Primary Care, Institute of Population Health, University of Manchester, Williamson Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK. maria.panagioti@manchester.ac.uk.
Gerry Richardson
Nicola Small
Elizabeth Murray
Anne Rogers
Anne Kennedy
Stanton Newman
Peter Bower

Funding

Department of Health 11/1014/06
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is increasing interest in the role of 'self-management' interventions to support the management of long-term conditions in health service settings. Self-management may include patient education, support for decision-making, self-monitoring and psychological and social support. Self-management support has potential to improve the efficiency of health services by reducing other forms of utilisation (such as primary care or hospital use), but a shift to self-management may lead to negative outcomes, such as patients who feel more anxious about their health, are less able to cope, or who receive worse quality of care, all of which may impact on their health and quality of life. We sought to determine which models of self-management support are associated with significant reductions in health services utilisation without compromising outcomes among patients with long-term conditions.

methodsWe used systematic review with meta-analysis. We included randomised controlled trials in patients with long-term conditions which included self-management support interventions and reported measures of service utilisation or costs, as well as measures of health outcomes (standardized disease specific quality of life, generic quality of life, or depression/anxiety).We searched multiple databases (CENTRAL, CINAHL, Econlit, EMBASE, HEED, MEDLINE, NHS EED and PsycINFO) and the reference lists of published reviews. We calculated effects sizes for both outcomes and costs, and presented the results in permutation plots, as well as conventional meta-analyses.

resultsWe included 184 studies. Self-management support was associated with small but significant improvements in health outcomes, with the best evidence of effectiveness in patients with diabetic, respiratory, cardiovascular and mental health conditions. Only a minority of self-management support interventions reported reductions in health care utilisation in association with decrements in health. Evidence for reductions in utilisation associated with self-management support was strongest in respiratory and cardiovascular problems. Studies at higher risk of bias were more likely to report benefits.

conclusionsSelf-management support interventions can reduce health service utilization without compromising patient health outcomes, although effects were generally small, and the evidence was strongest in respiratory and cardiovascular disorders. Further work is needed to determine which components of self-management support are most effective.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareSelf CareSocial SupportAgedFemaleHealth ServicesHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID25164529
PMCPMC4177163

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.