ArticlePrimary health care research & development2026
Patient experiences with the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool in primary care: a qualitative study.
Article in Primary health care research & development, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spanish adaptation and validation of the Capability Cards for use in community primary health care.Primary health care research & development · 2026Article
- Development and psychometric properties of the 'Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool' for people with chronic heart failure (CHF): a mixed methods approach.Family medicine and community health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThis study aims to assess the perspectives of patients with chronic conditions on the use of the Assessment of Burden of Chronic Conditions (ABCC) tool during consultations with their healthcare providers in primary care.
backgroundThe increasing prevalence of chronic conditions, including multimorbidity, poses major challenges to healthcare systems today, particularly in primary care where most chronic care takes place. Effective management strategies are crucial for improving quality of life (QoL). The ABCC tool offers a unique approach to chronic disease management by facilitating shared decision-making and self-management.
methodsThis qualitative phenomenological study involved semi-structured interviews. Fourteen patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and/or chronic heart failure (CHF) were recruited from a previously conducted quasi-experimental study on the effectiveness of the ABCC tool.
findingsParticipants generally expressed satisfaction with the comprehensive questionnaire, user-friendly design and clear visualisation. They appreciated the opportunity to facilitate discussions with healthcare providers and help with monitoring. However, some confusion around the grey balloons in the tool highlighted the need for clearer explanations. Participants had limited awareness of advanced treatment recommendation functions.
conclusionsThis study provides valuable insights into patients' experiences with the ABCC tool. Despite challenges such as recall bias and limited awareness of certain features, participants generally expressed satisfaction with using the tool. Based on these findings, the tool can be further improved and its use should be further supported. However, the ABCC tool shows promise as a valuable instrument for improving consultations in clinical practice.
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.