Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42367259›Full record

ArticleLearning health systems2026

Person-Centered Care Planning for People With Multiple Chronic Conditions: An Environmental Scan of Models and Approaches.

Annette M Totten, David A Dorr, Arlene S Bierman, Kisha Coa, Chandler Atchison, Cynthia Davis-O'Reilly, Katherine D Peak, Shannon Sweeney, Deborah J Cohen, Ana R Quiñones

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Learning health systems, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors.

Annette M TottenDivision of Informatics, Clinical Epidemiology and Translational Data Science, Department of Medicine Oregon Health & Science University Portland Oregon USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9100-8678
David A DorrDivision of Informatics, Clinical Epidemiology and Translational Data Science, Department of Medicine Oregon Health & Science University Portland Oregon USA.
Arlene S BiermanIndependent Consultant Washington DC USA.
Kisha CoaANR Market Research Consultants Richmond Virginia USA.
Chandler AtchisonDivision of Informatics, Clinical Epidemiology and Translational Data Science, Department of Medicine Oregon Health & Science University Portland Oregon USA.
Cynthia Davis-O'ReillyDivision of Informatics, Clinical Epidemiology and Translational Data Science, Department of Medicine Oregon Health & Science University Portland Oregon USA.
Katherine D PeakDivision of Informatics, Clinical Epidemiology and Translational Data Science, Department of Medicine Oregon Health & Science University Portland Oregon USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-9063-8135
Shannon SweeneyDepartment of Family Medicine Oregon Health & Science University Portland Oregon USA.
Deborah J CohenDepartment of Family Medicine Oregon Health & Science University Portland Oregon USA.
Ana R QuiñonesDepartment of Family Medicine Oregon Health & Science University Portland Oregon USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Person-centered care planning (PCCP) involves active collaboration between people seeking care, clinical teams, and others to co-create longitudinal treatment plans. It is a crucial part of care for people with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) and other complex needs. Despite the widespread acceptance of the concept, the use of PCCP in the US is variable. Many effective models of PCCP exist but uptake has been limited. Objective: We sought to identify and assess current models and approaches for PCCP by performing a multi-component environmental scan. Methods: We conducted targeted literature reviews based on streamlined systematic review methods and qualitative interviews with key informants, identified for their relevant expertise and frontline knowledge of PCCP models. Results: In all, 966 abstracts and 187 full articles met review criteria. We identified 40 models with elements fitting into 7 categories of how they differed from usual care (adding People/Roles, innovative Payment/Incentives, novel Technology, decision support Tools, Services, Functions, and Changing Focus). Most were multi-component models with evidence of effectiveness in outcomes that address the quintuple aim. Barriers to adoption and integration across sectors were primarily lack of time and appropriate payment mechanisms. A small set of measures for PCCP was identified that focused primarily on patient experience and goal setting. Similarly, a small number of PCCP models connected with social services organizations to address health-related social needs and highlighted challenges with data sharing and payment as well as growing collaborations in community care hubs to address social needs. KI interviews echoed and deepened our understanding of these findings by contextualizing experiences with barriers and factors facilitating the delivery of PCCP. Discussion: PCCP is a key aspect of high-quality care for people with MCCs; uptake is limited with barriers related to time and resources. Facilitators include alignment with healthcare system objectives and practices, and ready-to-deploy resources that enable coordinated PCCP care across providers. To promote greater adoption of PCCP concerted efforts are needed to share implementation details, success stories, and build the case for PCCP with patients, their families, and healthcare system leaders.

Indexed as

care planningmultiple chronic conditionsolder adultsperson‐centered carepractice changescoping review

Identifiers

PMID42367259
PMCPMC13308387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.