Cited by 41Nursing care and researchOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchDiabetes Management and Education

Managing everyday life: Self-management strategies people use to live well with neurological conditions

Open access
Audulv, Åsa, Hutchinson, Susan, Warner, Grace, Kephart, George, Versnel, Joan, Packer, Tanya L·2021·Patient Education and Counseling

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This paper uses the Taxonomy of Everyday Self-management Strategies (TEDSS) to provide insight and understanding into the complex and interdependent self-management strategies people with neurological conditions use to manage everyday life. METHODS: As part of a national Canadian study, structured telephone interviews were conducted monthly for eleven months, with 117 people living with one or more neurological conditions. Answers to five open-ended questions were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. A total of 7236 statements were analyzed. RESULTS: Findings are presented in two overarching patterns: 1) self-management pervades all aspects of life, and 2) self-management is a chain of decisions and behaviours. Participants emphasized management of daily activities and social relationships as important to maintaining meaning in their lives. CONCLUSION: Managing everyday life with a neurological condition includes a wide range of diverse strategies that often interact and complement each other. Some people need to intentionally manage every aspect of everyday life. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: For people living with neurological conditions, there is a need for health providers and systems to go beyond standard advice for self-management. Self-management support is best tailored to each individual, their life context and the realities of their illness trajectory.

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 · 10.1016/j.pec.2020.07.025

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The TEDSS framework was derived from the literature and interviews with 117 individuals living with chronic neurological conditions.

    “The TEDSS framework, derived from the literature and interviews with 117 individuals living with chronic neurological conditions, was chosen for its robust and comprehensive categorization of strategies commonly used and considered important by people living with chronic conditions [19,30,31].”

    From Features of Structured, One-to-One Videoconference Interventions That Actively Engage People in the Management of Their Chronic Conditions: Scoping Review (2025) · cites this paper as [31]

    The Design and setting section says TEDSS emerged from the LINC study, and the Discussion says interviews with 117 participants supplied data also used to validate and refine TEDSS. Our copy does not say the framework was derived from the literature, so that part of the attributed claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. T.L. Packer, T. Sampalli, A.C. Keddy, G. Kephart, Å. Audulv, S. Ryan-Carson, L. Sutherland, M. Burton, M. Mooney, K. Bartholomew-Pushie, K. MacLean, I. d'Entremont, Using the Taxonomy of Everyday Self-Management Strategies (TEDSS) framework to guide quality improvement in chronic disease management in Nova Scotia, Canadian Association for Health Services and Policy Research Conference, Halifax, Canada, 2019.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Audulv, Å., Hutchinson, S., Warner, G., Kephart, G., Versnel, J., & Packer, T. L.
Affiliations
  • Mid Sweden University (SE)
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
Corresponding author
Audulv, Åsa
Venue
Patient Education and Counseling
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-02
Volume
104
Issue
2
Pages
413-421
ISSN
0738-3991 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3046687596
Cited by
41
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2
FWCI
5.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Patient Education and Counseling (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Neuroförbundet
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  • Nova Scotia Health Research Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Therapy Practice and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
self-management strategies, neurological disorders, daily life management, daily activities, interpersonal relationships, meaning in life, self-management support, illness trajectory
MeSH terms
Self-Management, Canada, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Qualitative Research

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