ArticleLearning health systems2026
Shared Experiences and Care Improvement Priorities for Multimorbidity Management: An Experience-Based Co-Design Study.
Article in Learning health systems, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Multimorbidity-coexistence of two or more chronic conditions in the same individual-is a growing global healthcare challenge. Despite recognition of the difficulties in managing multimorbidity, there is a limited understanding of lived experiences and care improvement priorities as identified by key stakeholders. Objectives: The study aimed to explore lived experiences of patients with multimorbidity, their family caregivers, and interprofessional healthcare workers, and to identify shared care improvement priorities. These findings were synthesized into a multimorbidity management toolkit. Methods: An experience-based co-design study with six stages was implemented, considering human-centered design. Participants included patients aged 50 years and above living with heart failure and multimorbidity, family caregivers, and multidisciplinary healthcare professionals recruited in Maryland, USA. Following study preparation and ethical approval (Stage 1), in-depth individual interviews (Stages 2 and 3) were conducted, and the results were discussed during co-design events and working group meetings (Stages 4 and 5) to reach a consensus on care priorities and specific strategies. The study findings were summarized into a multimorbidity management toolkit that was shared with participants at a celebration event (Stage 6). Data analysis included descriptive statistics and inductive thematic methods. Results: Forty-six individual interviews were conducted: 24 patients (mean ± SD age 71 ± 9 years; 54% women; with an average of 8 morbidities), 7 family caregivers (mean ± SD age 64 ± 14 years; 57% women), and 15 healthcare professionals (mean ± SD age 36 ± 10 years). A total of 18 participants attended two co-design events. Multiple working group meetings were organized to receive diverse input. Four shared care improvement priorities emerged: (1) communication, (2) care coordination and follow-up care, (3) mental and emotional support, and (4) health education for patients and caregivers. Conclusion: Person-centered care models that emphasize shared strategies to improve communication, care coordination, education, and emotional support, as outlined in the toolkit, may enhance multimorbidity management and patient outcomes.
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.