Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 233

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Effect of Guided Care Teams on the Use of Health Services: Results From a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Boult, Chad, Reider, Lisa, Leff, Bruce, Frick, Kevin D., Boyd, Cynthia M., Wolff, Jennifer L., Frey, Katherine, Karm, Lya, Wegener, Stephen T., Mroz, Tracy, Scharfstein, Daniel O.·2011·Archives of Internal Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The effect of interdisciplinary primary care teams on the use of health services by patients with multiple chronic conditions is uncertain. This study aimed to measure the effect of guided care teams on multimorbid older patients' use of health services. METHODS: Eligible patients from 3 health care systems in the Baltimore, Maryland-Washington, DC, area were cluster-randomized to receive guided care or usual care for 20 months between November 1, 2006, and June 30, 2008. Eight services of a guided care nurse working in partnership with patients' primary care physicians were provided: comprehensive assessment, evidence-based care planning, monthly monitoring of symptoms and adherence, transitional care, coordination of health care professionals, support for self-management, support for family caregivers, and enhanced access to community services. Outcome measures were frequency of use of emergency departments, hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, home health agencies, primary care physician services, and specialty physician services. RESULTS: The study included 850 older patients at high risk for using health care heavily in the future. The only statistically significant overall effect of guided care in the whole sample was a reduction in episodes of home health care (odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.93). In a preplanned analysis, guided care also reduced skilled nursing facility admissions (odds ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.89) and days (0.48; 0.28-0.84) among Kaiser-Permanente patients. CONCLUSIONS: Guided care reduces the use of home health care but has little effect on the use of other health services in the short run. Its positive effect on Kaiser-Permanente patients' use of skilled nursing facilities and other health services is intriguing. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00121940.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.540

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 233

Metadata

Authors
Boult, C., Reider, L., Leff, B., Frick, K. D., Boyd, C. M., Wolff, J. L., Frey, K., Karm, L., Wegener, S. T., Mroz, T., & Scharfstein, D. O.
Venue
Archives of Internal Medicine
Published
2011-03-14
Volume
171
Issue
5
Pages
460-6
ISSN
0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2091064792
Cited by
233
References
3
FWCI
15.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Effect of Guided Care Teams on the Use of Health Services: Results From a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archinternmed.2010.540
The paper
Boult, C., Reider, L., Leff, B., Frick, K. D., Boyd, C. M., Wolff, J. L., Frey, K., Karm, L., Wegener, S. T., Mroz, T., & Scharfstein, D. O. (2011). The Effect of Guided Care Teams on the Use of Health Services: Results From a Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial. Archives of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2010.540

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.