Trial reportBMC public health2012
Cluster randomized controlled trial of a peer support program for people with diabetes: study protocol for the Australasian Peers for Progress study.
Trial report in BMC public health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04012697 (A Randomized Controlled Trial of Peer Support Workers in the Emergency Department for People Experiencing Homelessness in the Niagara Region of Ontario, Canada), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Peer Support Workers in the Emergency Department for People Experiencing Homelessness in the Niagara Region of Ontario, Canada
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Effectiveness of peer support to increase uptake of retinal examination for diabetic retinopathy: study protocol for the DURE pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial in Kirinyaga, Kenya.BMC public health · 2018Trial
- Peer support to improve diabetes care: an implementation evaluation of the Australasian Peers for Progress Diabetes Program.BMC public health · 2018Trial
- Cluster randomised controlled trial of a peer-led lifestyle intervention program: study protocol for the Kerala diabetes prevention program.BMC public health · 2013Trial
- "Not Today, Diabetes": Using Blog Analysis to Understand Emotional Interactions and Support Among People With Type 1 Diabetes.Frontiers in clinical diabetes and healthcare · 2020Article
- Developing and feasibility testing of data collection methods for an economic evaluation of a supported selfmanagement programme for adults with a learning disability and type 2 diabetes.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2018Article
- Article
- Cardiovascular risk outcome and program evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial of a community-based, lay peer led program for people with diabetes.BMC public health · 2016Article
- Effect of peer education on self-management and psychological status in type 2 diabetes patients with emotional disorders.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2015Article
- Toward integrated and sustainable prevention against diabetes in rural China: study rationale and protocol of eCROPS.BMC endocrine disorders · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWell managed diabetes requires active self-management in order to ensure optimal glycaemic control and appropriate use of available clinical services and other supports. Peer supporters can assist people with their daily diabetes self-management activities, provide emotional and social support, assist and encourage clinical care and be available when needed.
methodsA national database of Australians diagnosed with type 2 diabetes is being used to invite people in pre-determined locations to participate in community-based peer support groups. Peer supporters are self-identified from these communities. All consenting participants receive diabetes self-management education and education manual prior to randomization by community to a peer support intervention or usual care. This multi-faceted intervention comprises four interconnected components for delivering support to the participants. (1) Trained supporters lead 12 monthly group meetings. Participants are assisted to set goals to improve diabetes self-management, discuss with and encourage each other to strengthen linkages with local clinical services (including allied health services) as well as provide social and emotional support. (2) Support through regular supporter-participant or participant-participant contact, between monthly sessions, is also promoted in order to maintain motivation and encourage self-improvement and confidence in diabetes self-management. (3) Participants receive a workbook containing diabetes information, resources and community support services, key diabetes management behaviors and monthly goal setting activity sheets. (4) Finally, a password protected website contains further resources for the participants. Supporters are mentored and assisted throughout the intervention by other supporters and the research team through attendance at a weekly teleconference. Data, including a self-administered lifestyle survey, anthropometric and biomedical measures are collected on all participants at baseline, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome is change in cardiovascular disease risk using the UKPDS risk equation. Secondary outcomes include biomedical, quality of life, psychosocial functioning, and other lifestyle measures. An economic evaluation will determine whether the program is cost effective. DISCUSSION: This manuscript presents the protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial of group-based peer support for people with type 2 diabetes in a community setting. Results from this trial will contribute evidence about the effectiveness of peer support in achieving effective self-management of diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR); ACTRN12609000469213.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.