Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26560970›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2015

Validation of Self-Management Screening (SeMaS), a tool to facilitate personalised counselling and support of patients with chronic diseases.

Nathalie Eikelenboom, Ivo Smeele, Marjan Faber, Annelies Jacobs, Frank Verhulst, Joyca Lacroix, Michel Wensing, Jan van Lieshout

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Effectiveness of personalised support for self-management in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2016
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

8 authors.

Nathalie EikelenboomRadboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, P.O. Box 9101, 114, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. nathalie.eikelenboom@radboudumc.nl.
Ivo SmeeleDOH care group, P.O. Box 704, , 5600, AS, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. i.smeele@upcmail.nl.
Marjan FaberRadboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, P.O. Box 9101, 114, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. marjan.faber@radboudumc.nl.
Annelies JacobsRadboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, P.O. Box 9101, 114, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. annelies.jacobs@radboudumc.nl.
Frank VerhulstDoen en blijven doen, Icaruslaan 39, 5631 LH, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. frankverhulst@onsneteindhoven.nl.
Joyca LacroixPhilips Research, High Tech Campus 34, 5656 AE, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. Joyca.lacroix@philips.com.
Michel WensingRadboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, P.O. Box 9101, 114, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. michel.wensing@radboudumc.nl.
Jan van LieshoutRadboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ healthcare, P.O. Box 9101, 114, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. jan.vanlieshout@radboudumc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA rising number of people with chronic conditions is offered interventions to enhance self-management. The responsiveness of individuals to these interventions depends on patient characteristics. We aimed to develop and validate a tool to facilitate personalised counselling and support for self-management in patients with chronic diseases in primary care.

methodsWe drafted a prototype of the tool for Self-Management Screening (SeMaS), comprising 27 questions that were mainly derived from validated questionnaires. To reach high content validity, we performed a literature review and held focus groups with patients and healthcare professionals as input for the tool. The characteristics self-efficacy, locus of control, depression, anxiety, coping, social support, and perceived burden of disease were incorporated into the tool. Three items were added to guide the type of support or intervention, being computer skills, functioning in groups, and willingness to perform self-monitoring. Subsequently, the construct and criterion validity of the tool were investigated in a sample of 204 chronic patients from two primary care practices. Patients filled in the SeMaS and a set of validated questionnaires for evaluation of SeMaS. The Patient Activation Measure (PAM-13), a generic instrument to measure patient health activation, was used to test the convergent construct validity.

resultsPatients had a mean age of 66.8 years and 46.6 % was female. 5.9 % did not experience any barrier to self-management, 28.9 % experienced one minor or major barrier, and 30.4 % two minor or major barriers. Compared to the criterion measures, the positive predictive value of the SeMaS characteristics ranged from 41.5 to 77.8 % and the negative predictive value ranged from 53.3 to 99.4 %. Crohnbach's alpha for internal consistency ranged from 0.56 to 0.87, except for locus of control (α = 0.02). The regression model with PAM-13 as a dependent variable showed that the SeMaS explained 31.7 % (r(2) = 0.317) of the variance in the PAM-13 score.

conclusionsSeMaS is a short validated tool that can signal potential barriers for self-management that need to be addressed in the dialogue with the patient. As such it can be used to facilitate personalised counselling and support to enhance self-management in patients with chronic conditions in primary care.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalAgedAnxietyCost of IllnessCounselingDepressionFemaleHeadache DisordersHumansInternal-External ControlMaleReproducibility of ResultsSelf CareSelf EfficacySocial SupportSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID26560970
PMCPMC4641335

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.