Approaches to Self‐Management in Chronic Illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Management of a chronic medical condition is a complex process and requires coordinated action between healthcare providers and patients. This process is further complicated by the fact that an increasing number of patients suffer from multiple chronic conditions. Self-management involves active participation of the patients in the everyday care of the symptoms of their illness(es) and medical treatments, as well as maintaining general health and prevention of progression of medical conditions. Managing the psychosocial consequences of illness is also an important component of self-management. Data have demonstrated that enhancing self-management improves quality of life, coping, symptom management, disability, and reduces healthcare expenditures and service utilization. To foster self-management, potential barriers to implementation as well as facilitators and supports for this approach must be acknowledged. In this article, we review various aspects of self-management in chronic illness, focusing on chronic kidney disease. Better understanding of these concepts will facilitate patient-provider collaboration, improve patient care with increased patient and staff satisfaction, and may ultimately result in better clinical outcomes and enhanced quality of life for both the patients and their families.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".