CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 193Chronic Disease Management StrategiesDiabetes Management and EducationPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Supporting self-management of chronic health conditions: common approaches.

Lawn, Sharon, Schoo, Adrian·2010·Patient Education and Counseling
DOI 10.1016/j.pec.2009.10.006
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective The aims of this paper are to provide a description of the principles of chronic condition self-management, common approaches to support currently used in Australian health services, and benefits and challenges associated with using these approaches.Methods We examined literature in this field in Australia and drew also from our own practice experience of implementing these approaches and providing education and training to primary health care professionals and organizations in the field.Results Using common examples of programs, advantages and disadvantages of peer-led groups (Stanford Courses), care planning (The Flinders Program), a brief primary care approach (the 5As), motivational interviewing and health coaching are explored.Conclusions There are a number of common approaches used to enhance self-management. No one approach is superior to other approaches; in fact, they are often complimentary.Practice implications The nature and context for patients' contact with services, and patients' specific needs and preferences are what must be considered when deciding on the most appropriate support mode to effectively engage patients and promote self-management. Choice of approach will also be determined by organizational factors and service structures. Whatever self-management support approaches used, of importance is how health services work together to provide support.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pec.2009.10.006

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 54 references

2 of the 54 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–193 of 193

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Lawn, S., & Schoo, A.
Affiliations
Flinders University (AU)
Corresponding author
Lawn, Sharon
ORCID
Venue
Patient Education and Counseling
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-08
Volume
80
Issue
2
Pages
205-211
ISSN
0738-3991 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.pec.2009.10.006
OpenAlex
W1986282187
Cited by
193
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 12
FWCI
0.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Patient Education and Counseling (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Flinders Academic Commons (Flinders University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
self-management, chronic disease, care planning, motivational interviewing, health coaching, primary care, patient engagement, health service collaboration, Australia
MeSH terms
Australia, Chronic Disease, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Motivation, Patient Education as Topic, Peer Group, Self Care, Self-Help Groups, Social Support, Patient-Centered Care

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