Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18843736›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008

Peer support telephone calls for improving health.

Jeremy Dale, Isabela O Caramlau, Antje Lindenmeyer, Susan M Williams

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
26.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

59 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 137 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Peer support for people with schizophrenia or other serious mental illness.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jeremy DaleHealth Sciences Research Institute, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill campus, Coventry, Warwickshire, UK, CV4 7AL. jeremy.dale@warwick.ac.uk
Isabela O Caramlau
Antje Lindenmeyer
Susan M Williams
University of Warwick · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeer support telephone calls have been used for a wide range of health-related concerns. However, little is known about their effects.

objectivesTo assess the effects of peer support telephone calls in terms of physical (e.g. blood pressure), psychological (e.g. depressive symptoms), and behavioural health outcomes (e.g. uptake of mammography) and other outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched: The Cochrane Library databases (CENTRAL, DARE, CDSR) (issue 4 2007); MEDLINE (OVID) (January 1966 to December 2007); EMBASE (OVID) (January 1985 to December 2007); CINAHL (Athens) (January 1966 to December 2007), trials registers and reference lists of articles, with no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of peer support interventions delivered by telephone call. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data. We present results narratively and in tabular format. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity between studies. MAIN

resultsWe included seven studies involving 2492 participants.Peer support telephone calls were associated with an increase in mammography screening, with 49% of women in the intervention group and 34% of women in the control group receiving a mammogram since the start of the intervention (P </ = 0.001). In another study, peer telephone support calls were found to maintain mammography screening uptake for baseline adherent women (P = 0.029).Peer support telephone calls for post myocardial infarction patients were associated at six months with a change in diet in the intervention and usual care groups of 54% and 44% respectively (P = 0.03). In another study for post myocardial infarction patients there were no significant differences between groups for self-efficacy, health status and mental health outcomes.Peer support telephone calls were associated with greater continuation of breastfeeding in mothers at 3 months post partum (P = 0.01).Peer support telephone calls were associated with reduced depressive symptoms in mothers with postnatal depression (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) > 12). The peer support intervention significantly decreased depressive symptomatology at the 4-week assessment (odds ratio (OR) 6.23 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 33.77; P = 0.02)) and 8-week assessment (OR 6.23 (95% CI 1.40 to 27.84; P = 0.01). One study investigated the use of peer support for patients with poorly controlled diabetes. There were no significant differences between groups for self-efficacy, HbA1C, cholesterol level and body mass index. AUTHORS'

conclusionsWhilst this review provides some evidence that peer support telephone calls can be effective for certain health-related concerns, few of the studies were of high quality and so results should be interpreted cautiously. There were many methodological limitations thus limiting the generalisability of findings. Overall, there is a need for further well designed randomised controlled studies to clarify the cost and clinical effectiveness of peer support telephone calls for improvement in health and health-related behaviour.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorHealth StatusPeer GroupTelephoneChronic DiseaseCounselingFemaleHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID18843736
PMCPMC7386897
OpenAlexW1820639382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.