MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245753779 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-144669/v1

Interventions for Improving Outcomes in Patients With Multimorbidity in Primary Care and Community Setting: A Systematic Review

2021· review· en· W4245753779 on OpenAlexaff
Susan M. Smith, Emma Wallace, Barbara Clyne, Fiona Boland, Martin Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersHealth Research Board
KeywordsPsychological interventionPrimary careMultimorbidityMedicineIntensive care medicinePsychologyNursingFamily medicineChronic disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BackgroundMultimorbidity, defined as the co-existence of two or more chronic conditions, presents significant challenges to patients, healthcare providers and health systems. Despite this, there is ongoing uncertainty about the most effective ways to manage patients with multimorbidity. This review aimed to determine the effectiveness of interventions designed to improve outcomes in people with multimorbidity in primary care and community settings, compared to usual care.MethodsWe searched eight databases and two trials registers up to 9th September 2019. Two review authors independently screened and selected studies, extracted data, evaluated study quality and judged the certainty of the evidence (GRADE). Interventions were grouped by their predominant focus into care-coordination/self-management support, self-management support and medicines management. Main outcomes were health related quality of life (HRQoL) and mental health. Meta-analyses were conducted, where possible, but the synthesis was predominantly narrative.ResultsWe included 16 RCTs with 4,753 participants, the majority being older adults with at least three conditions. There were eight care-coordination/self-management support studies, four self-management support studies and four medicines management studies. There was little or no evidence of an effect on primary outcomes of HRQoL (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.07, I 2 = 39%) and mental health or on secondary outcomes with a small number of studies reporting that care coordination may improve patient experience of care and self-management support may improve patient health behaviours. Overall the certainty of the evidence was graded as low due to significant variation in study participants and interventions. Conclusions There are remaining uncertainties about the effectiveness of interventions for people with multimorbidity, despite the growing number of RCTs conducted in this area. Our findings suggest that future research should consider patient experience of care, optimising medicines management and targeted patient health behaviours such as exercise.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.179
GPT teacher head0.488
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207