Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18366665›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2008

Self-management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a qualitative investigation from the perspective of participants in a nurse-led, shared-care programme in the Netherlands.

Albine Moser, Harry van der Bruggen, Guy Widdershoven, Cor Spreeuwenberg

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Albine MoserDepartment of Health Ethics and Philosophy, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, The Netherlands. a.moser@zw.unimaas.nl
Harry van der Bruggen
Guy Widdershoven
Cor Spreeuwenberg

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiabetes mellitus is a major public health problem. Little is known about how people with type 2 diabetes experience self-management in a nurse-led, shared-care programme. The purpose of this article is to report an empirically grounded conceptualization of self-management in the context of autonomy of people with type 2 diabetes.

methodsThis study has a qualitative descriptive, and exploratory design with an inductive approach. Data were collected by means of in-depth interviews. The sample consisted of older adults with type 2 diabetes in a nurse-led, shared-care setting. The data analysis was completed by applying the constant comparative analysis as recommended in grounded theory.

resultsPeople with type 2 diabetes use three kinds of self-management processes: daily, off-course, and preventive. The steps for daily self-management are adhering, adapting, and acting routinely. The steps for off-course self-management are becoming aware, reasoning, deciding, acting, and evaluating. The steps for preventive self-management are experiencing, learning, being cautious, and putting into practice. These processes are interwoven and recurring.

conclusionSelf-management consists of a complex and dynamic set of processes and it is deeply embedded in one's unique life situation. Support from diabetes specialist nurses and family caregivers is a necessity of self-managing diabetes.

Indexed as

Personal AutonomySelf CareAgedDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Disease ManagementFemaleHealth StatusHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsNurse CliniciansNurse-Patient RelationsNursing Methodology ResearchPatient Compliance

Identifiers

PMID18366665
PMCPMC2292711

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.