Cited by 1,269Chronic Disease Management StrategiesDiabetes Management and EducationPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Collaborative Management of Chronic Illness

Von Korff, Michael, Gruman, Jessie, Schaefer, Judith, Curry, Susan J., Wagner, Edward H.·1997·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

In chronic illness, day-to-day care responsibilities fall most heavily on patients and their families. Effective collaborative relationships with health care providers can help patients and families better handle self-care tasks. Collaborative management is care that strengthens and supports self-care in chronic illness while assuring that effective medical, preventive, and health maintenance interventions take place. In this paper, the following essential elements of collaborative management developed in light of behavioral principles and empirical evidence about effective care in chronic illness are discussed: 1) collaborative definition of problems, in which patient-defined problems are identified along with medical problems diagnosed by physicians; 2) targeting, goal setting, and planning, in which patients and providers focus on a specific problem, set realistic objectives, and develop an action plan for attaining those objectives in the context of patient preferences and readiness; 3) creation of a continuum of self-management training and support services, in which patients have access to services that teach skills needed to carry out medical regimens, guide health behavior changes, and provide emotional support; and 4) active and sustained follow-up, in which patients are contacted at specified intervals to monitor health status, identify potential complications, and check and reinforce progress in implementing the care plan. These elements make up a common core of services for chronic illness care that need not be reinvented for each disease.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7326/0003-4819-127-12-199712150-00008

Cites

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 998

Metadata

Authors
Von Korff, M., Gruman, J., Schaefer, J., Curry, S. J., & Wagner, E. H.
Affiliations
  • From Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle, Washington; and the Center for the Advancement of Health, Washington, D.C.
  • Group Health Cooperative (US)
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
1997-12-15
Volume
127
Issue
12
Pages
1097-1102
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2048179962
Cited by
1,269
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 47 · 2013: 59 · 2012: 65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
chronic disease, collaborative care, patient-provider relationship, self-care, self-management education, goal setting, action planning, patient preferences, follow-up care, health behavior change, emotional support, preventive medicine
MeSH terms
Chronic Disease, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Patient Care Planning, Patient Care Team, Patient Education as Topic, Self Care, Social Support, Health Behavior, Practice Guidelines as Topic

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