ArticleMedicine2022
Impact of multidisciplinary chronic disease collaboration management on self-management of hypertension patients: A cohort study.
Article in Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-world care patterns and specialist encounters of patients with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease-related interstitial lung disease in the United States: a retrospective administrative claims database analysis.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Article
- Sustainability Planning for a Community Network to Increase Participation in Evidence-Based Lifestyle Change Programs: A Mixed-Methods Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To explore the effect of the interdisciplinary chronic disease management (CDM) model on patients with hypertension. In this intervention study, the subjects were divided into CDM and control groups. Blood pressure control was monitored in both groups. After 1 year of follow-up, the endpoint events of patients and their knowledge, confidence, and behavior in response to the disease were assessed. When compared with the control group, patients in the CDM group obtained higher scores for self-perception and management assessment, and their blood pressure control was also better after discharge. The quality of life and the satisfaction level of patients in the control group were lower than those in the CDM group, while the unplanned readmission rate, incidence of complications, and the average length of hospital stay in the control group were higher than those in the CDM group. CDM model was beneficial to blood pressure control in hypertensive patients. It had also improved the quality of life and the satisfaction level of the hypertensive patients. Our study highlights the importance of the CDM model in the prognosis of hypertensive patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.