Evidence Hub

Latent profile and determinants of self-management behaviors among older adult patients with chronic diseases: a cross-sectional study

Yujiao Shao, Xiaocui Duan, Xue-Jun Xu, Hong-Yan Guo, Zeyu Zhang, Shuang Zhao, Fu-Zhi Wang, Yong-Xia Chen et al.

Frontiers in Public Health, 2025

536 participants · 22 citations

Abstract

Objective To explore latent profiles of self-management behaviors in older adult patients with chronic diseases and identify the factors that influence different profiles, guiding targeted interventions. Methods This study used convenience sampling to recruit 536 older adult patients with chronic diseases from three tertiary hospitals in Anhui Province between October 2023 and May 2024. Data were collected using a general information questionnaire, the age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (aCCI), the Chronic Disease Self-Management Behavior Scale, the Chronic Disease Management Self-Efficacy Scale, the Psychological Status Scale, the Digital Health Literacy Scale, and the Social Support Scale. Latent profile analysis was conducted using Mplus 8.3, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed using SPSS 26.0. Results Three profiles of self-management behaviors emerged: “Low Self-Management” (50.2%), “High Exercise and Cognitive Management” (8.6%), and “Moderate Management with Enhanced Communication” (41.2%). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that residence, aCCI, number of digital devices used, perceived usefulness of digital health information, digital health literacy, social support, chronic disease management self-efficacy, and psychological status were significant factors affecting self-management profiles (all p < 0.05). Conclusion Self-management behaviors in older adult patients with chronic diseases were generally low, with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 536 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free