Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25791842›Full record

ReviewArchives of disease in childhood2015

What makes for a 'good' or 'bad' paediatric diabetes service from the viewpoint of children, young people, carers and clinicians? A synthesis of qualitative findings.

Katherine Curtis-Tyler, Lisa Arai, Terence Stephenson, Helen Roberts

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of disease in childhood, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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.

Katherine Curtis-TylerSchool of Health Sciences, City University London, London, UK.
Lisa AraiSchool of Health and Social Care, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.
Terence StephensonUCL Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Helen RobertsUCL Institute of Child Health, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is mounting evidence that experience of care is a crucial part of the pathway for successful management of long-term conditions. DESIGN AND

objectivesTo carry out (1) a systematic mapping of qualitative evidence to inform selection of studies for the second stage of the review; and (2) a narrative synthesis addressing the question, What makes for a 'good' or a 'bad' paediatric diabetes service from the viewpoint of children, young people, carers and clinicians?

resultsThe initial mapping identified 38 papers. From these, the findings of 20 diabetes-focused papers on the views on care of ≥650 children, parents and clinicians were synthesised. Only five studies included children under 11 years. Children and young people across all age groups valued positive, non-judgemental and relationship-based care that engaged with their social, as well as physical, health. Parents valued provision responsive to the circumstances of family life and coordinated across services. Clinicians wanting to engage with families beyond a child's immediate physical health described finding this hard to achieve in practice. LIMITATIONS: Socioeconomic status and ethnicity were poorly reported in the included studies.

conclusionsIn dealing with diabetes, and engaging with social health in a way valued by children, parents and clinicians, not only structural change, such as more time for consultation, but new skills for reworking relations in the consultation may be required.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelAttitude to HealthQuality Indicators, Health CareCaregiversChildChild Health ServicesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Evidence-Based MedicineFamilyHumansQualitative ResearchAdolescent HealthDiabetesHealth services researchPaediatric PracticeQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID25791842
PMCPMC4552916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.