Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40108515›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2025

Evaluation of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the chronic disease co-care (CDCC) Pilot Scheme: a study protocol.

Ivy L Mak, Kiki S N Liu, Zoey C T Wong, Vivian Y H Xu, Esther Y T Yu, Tony K H Ha, William C W Wong, Emily T Y Tse, Linda Chan, Amy P P Ng and 5 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06310148 (An Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of the Chronic Disease Co-Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

NCT06310148 narecruitingnot on this map

An Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of the Chronic Disease Co-Care (CDCC) Pilot Scheme: a Commissioned Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe University of Hong KongRan2024 to 2026Enrolled3,772ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Hypertension, Chronic Disease, Disease ManagementArmsThe Chronic Disease Co-Care (CDCC) Pilot Scheme
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

15 authors.

Ivy L Mak *Department of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Kiki S N Liu *Department of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Zoey C T WongDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Vivian Y H XuDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Esther Y T YuPrimary Healthcare Commission, Health Bureau, Hong Kong, China.
Tony K H HaPrimary Healthcare Commission, Health Bureau, Hong Kong, China.
William C W WongDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Emily T Y TseDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Linda ChanDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Amy P P NgDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Edmond P H ChoiSchool of Nursing, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Martin RolandDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, The University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England.
David BishaiSchool of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Cindy L K LamDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Eric Y F WanDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. yfwan@hku.hk.

Funding

The Health and Medical Research Fund of the Health Bureau, the Government of Hong Kong CDCC-001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Chronic Disease Co-Care (CDCC) Pilot Scheme is a government-subsidized program that aims to provide targeted copayment for the screening and management of hypertension, diabetes mellitus and pre-diabetes in the private healthcare sector. Studies have found that concurrent screening and management with a multi-disciplinary intervention is cost-saving because of the reduction in the rates of premature mortality, complications and utilization of public health services. This study aims to evaluate the quality of care, acceptability, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the CDCC Pilot Scheme.

methodsQuality of care will be evaluated by the standards achieved by the program in each criterion in the domains of structure, process and outcomes of care. Site visits and two serial questionnaire surveys at 6 and 12 months will be conducted for the structure of care. Operational data, including the provision of diagnosis and treatment, as well as participants' health status will be extracted to evaluate the process and outcomes of care. Participants' acceptability will be evaluated on experience (accessibility, facility, continuity of care and communication), satisfaction (perceived usefulness, continuation and recommendation) and enablement in 548 CDCC participants at 3 and 12 months by telephone surveys. Evaluation of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness is a 1-year comparative cohort study using longitudinal data on changes in disease control parameters between CDCC and non-CDCC participants at baseline and 12 months. Costing questionnaires on the set-up and operation costs of the Scheme among service providers, and direct medical costs incurred from public and private service utilization among participants within 12 months from enrolment will be assessed. The incremental costs incurred for an additional participant in the CDCC Pilot Scheme to achieve target disease control outcomes after 12 months will be reported as an indicator for cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: The quality of care and effectiveness of the CDCC Pilot Scheme in enhancing the health outcomes of the Scheme participants will be examined. Standards of good practice and recommendations for quality enhancement will be established to inform service planning in similar cross-sector screening and management programme.

trial registrationNCT06310148; 2024-03-22.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusHypertensionChronic DiseaseCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansPilot ProjectsQuality of Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesCost-effectivenessDiabetes mellitusEffectivenessHypertensionManagementMulti-disciplinaryPrimary healthcareQuality of careScreening

Identifiers

PMID40108515
PMCPMC11921508

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.