Using Concept Mapping to Develop a Strategy for Self-Management Support for Underserved Populations Living With Chronic Conditions, British Columbia, August 2013–June 2014
ORIGINAL RESEARCH — Volume 12 — October 8, 2015
Figure 1 describes the cluster for fostering partnerships. The bivariate value plot (an x-y graph) referred to as the “go-zone” shows each statement within the cluster and how it was rated by participants for importance and feasibility (eg, 1 = relatively unimportant/not feasible, 2 = somewhat important/feasible, 3 = moderately important/feasible, 4 = very important/feasible, 5 = extremely important/feasible). Three statements (no. 18, no. 28, and no. 44) were rated above average in importance and feasibility. Two statements (no. 1 and no. 32) were rated below average in importance and feasibility. No statements were rated above average on importance and below average on feasibility, and none were rated above average on feasibility but below average on importance.
Figure 1. “Go zone” map for the cluster “fostering partnership” shows the average importance and feasibility rating data for the ideas included in this cluster. The right upper quadrant (green zone) represents the ideas that were rated above average on both importance and feasibility.
Figure 2 is a map of the 92 statements generated by this study as 2-dimensional polygons on the basis of how conceptually similar or dissimilar the ideas were to each other (ie, which statements clustered together). The name listed for each cluster represents the dominant theme based on the statements located in that cluster. Moving from top to bottom, there is a shift from actions at the system and community level to individual-level actions. This conceptual structure formed the foundation for the self-management support strategy for underserved populations.
Figure 2. The final 11-cluster solution of the 92 statements generated, grouped by 4 conceptual groupings: 1) fostering partnerships, 2) systems level system (actions implemented by governments, health care systems, nongovernment organizations), 3) community (actions addressed by communities and related organizations), and 4) individual (actions directed toward clients). The black lines represent the conceptual groupings of the 11 clusters.
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions.