Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23297781›Full record

Trial reportBMC family practice2013

Testing a peer support intervention for people with type 2 diabetes: a pilot for a randomised controlled trial.

David Simmons, Simon Cohn, Christopher Bunn, Kym Birch, Sarah Donald, Charlotte Paddison, Candice Ward, Peter Robins, A Toby Prevost, Jonathan Graffy

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC family practice, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Peer Mentors for People with Advanced Cancer: Lessons Learnt from Recruiting and Training Peer Mentors for a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2021
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Predictors and Effects of Participation in Peer Support: A Prospective Structural Equation Modeling Analysis.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. How patient and community involvement in diabetes research influences health outcomes: A realist review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

David SimmonsInstitute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK. david.simmons@addenbrookes.nhs.uk
Simon Cohn
Christopher Bunn
Kym Birch
Sarah Donald
Charlotte Paddison
Candice Ward
Peter Robins
A Toby Prevost
Jonathan Graffy
Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBKing's College London · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0610-22311
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople with Type 2 diabetes face various psycho-social, self-management and clinical care issues and evidence is mixed whether support from others with diabetes, 'peer support', can help. We now describe a 2 month pilot study of different peer support interventions.

methodsThe intervention was informed by formative evaluation using semi-structured interviews with health professionals, community support groups and observation of diabetes education and support groups. Invitations to participate were mailed from 4 general practices and included a survey of barriers to care. Participants were randomized by practice to receive individual, group, combined (both individual and group) or no peer support. Evaluation included ethnographic observation, semi-structured interviews and questionnaires at baseline and post-intervention.

resultsOf 1,101 invited, 15% expressed an interest in participating in the pilot. Sufficient numbers volunteered to become peer supporters, although 50% of these (8/16) withdrew. Those in the pilot were similar to other patients, but were less likely to feel they knew enough about diabetes (60.8% vs 44.6% p = 0.035) and less likely to be happy with the diabetes education/care to date (75.4% vs 55.4% p = 0.013). Key issues identified were the need to recruit peer supporters directly rather than through clinicians, to address participant diabetes educational needs early and the potential for group sessions to have lower participation rates than 1:1 sessions.

conclusionsRecruitment to a full trial of peer support within the existing study design is feasible with some amendments. Attendance emerged as a key issue needing close monitoring and additional intervention during the trial.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionPeer GroupSelf CareSocial SupportAgedAged, 80 and overDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPatient CompliancePatient Education as TopicPilot ProjectsProgram Evaluation

Identifiers

PMID23297781
PMCPMC3546024
OpenAlexW2144511656

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.