| Title |
Targeting “hardly reached” people with chronic illness: a feasibility study of a person-centered self-management education approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s148757 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Annemarie Reinhardt Varming, Rikke Torenholt, Tue Helms Andersen, Birgitte Lund Møller, Ingrid Willaing |
| Abstract |
Self-management education is critical to the development of successful health behavior changes related to chronic illness. However, people in high-risk groups attend less frequently or benefit less from patient education programs than do people with more socioeconomic advantages. The aim was to test the feasibility of a participatory person-centered education approach and tool-kit targeting self-management of chronic illness in hardly reached people. After participating in a training program, educators (n=77) tested the approach in practice. Data collection included online questionnaires for educators (n=65), observations of education sessions (n=7), and interviews with educators (n=11) and participants (n=22). Descriptive statistics were calculated. Transcripts of interviews and observations were analyzed using systematic text condensation. Feasibility was examined in terms of practicality, integration, suitability, and efficacy. Educators had a positive response to the approach and found that the tools supported involving participants in education and support. Participant satisfaction varied, depending on the ability of educators to integrate the tools into programs in a meaningful way. The tools provided time for reflection in the education process that benefited participants and educators alike. Educators found it challenging to allow participants to help set the agenda and to exchange experiences without educator control. Barriers to use reported by educators included lack of time for both training and preparation. The testing included varied groups of participants, some groups included members of hardly reached populations and others did not. Also, some tools were only tried in practice by a few educators. The approach was feasible in terms of practicality, integration, acceptability, and efficacy and perceived by educators as suitable for both hardly reached participants and those who are less disadvantaged. Implementation of the approach requires time for training and preparation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 12 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 10% |
| Psychology | 4 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 15 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 March 2018.
All research outputs
#17,438,425
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,046
of 1,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#285,061
of 450,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#25
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,733 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 450,135 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.