ArticleHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2014
The primary-specialty care interface in chronic diseases: patient and practice characteristics associated with co-management.
Article in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2014. 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.
- Access and Perceived Quality of Care in US Adults with Multiple Chronic Conditions: MEPS 2019-2021.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- REFERRAL WAIT TIME AND ILLNESS SEVERITY OF PATIENTS WITH NONCOMMUNICABLE DISEASES REFERRED TO SPECIALIST CLINICS OF A TERTIARY HEALTHCARE CENTRE IN SOUTH-WEST NIGERIA.Annals of Ibadan postgraduate medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Bridging the Divide-Understanding Primary Care and Specialty Care Perspectives on Chronic Disease Co-management: a National Survey.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- Role of Pharmacists in the Interprofessional Care Team for Patients with Chronic Diseases.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Review
- Sickle-Cell Disease Co-Management, Health Care Utilization, and Hydroxyurea Use.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSpecialist physicians may act either as consultants or co-managers for patients with chronic diseases along with their primary healthcare (PHC) physician. We assessed factors associated with specialist involvement.
methodsWe used questionnaire and administrative data to measure co-management and patient and PHC practice characteristics in 702 primary care patients with common chronic diseases. Analysis included multilevel logistic regressions.
resultsIn all, 27% of the participants were co-managed. Persons with more severe chronic diseases and lower health-related quality of life were more likely to be co-managed. Persons who were older, had a lower socioeconomic status, resided in rural regions and who were followed in a PHC practice with an advanced practice nurse were less likely to be co-managed. DISCUSSION: Co-management of patients with chronic diseases by a specialist is associated with higher clinical needs but demonstrates social inequalities. PHC practices more adapted to chronic care may help optimize specialist resources utilization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25617515PMC4748357What 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.