Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25969740›Full record

ArticleBMJ open diabetes research & care2015

Implementing a structured education program for children with diabetes: lessons learnt from an integrated process evaluation.

Mary Sawtell, Liz Jamieson, Meg Wiggins, Felicity Smith, Anne Ingold, Katrina Hargreaves, Meena Khatwa, Lucy Brooks, Rebecca Thompson, Deborah Christie

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open diabetes research & care, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Mary SawtellSocial Science Research Unit , UCL Institute of Education , London , UK.
Liz JamiesonDepartment of Practice and Policy , UCL School of Pharmacy , London , UK.
Meg WigginsSocial Science Research Unit , Institute of Education , London , UK.
Felicity SmithDepartment of Practice and Policy , UCL School of Pharmacy , London , UK.
Anne IngoldSocial Science Research Unit , Institute of Education , London , UK.
Katrina HargreavesSocial Science Research Unit , Institute of Education , London , UK.
Meena KhatwaSocial Science Research Unit , Institute of Education , London , UK.
Lucy BrooksMedical Statistics Department , London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine , London , UK.
Rebecca ThompsonUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust , London , UK.
Deborah ChristieUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust , London , UK.
University College London · GBUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is recognition of an urgent need for clinic-based interventions for young people with type 1 diabetes mellitus that improve glycemic control and quality of life. The Child and Adolescent Structured Competencies Approach to Diabetes Education (CASCADE) is a structured educational group program, using psychological techniques, delivered primarily by diabetes nurses. Composed of four modules, it is designed for children with poor diabetic control and their parents. A mixed methods process evaluation, embedded within a cluster randomized control trial, aimed to assess the feasibility, acceptability, fidelity, and perceived impact of CASCADE.

methods28 pediatric diabetes clinics across England participated and 362 children aged 8-16 years, with type 1 diabetes and a mean glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) of 8.5 or above, took part. The process evaluation used a wide range of research methods.

resultsOf the 180 families in the intervention group, only 55 (30%) received the full program with 53% attending at least one module. Only 68% of possible groups were run. Staff found organizing the groups burdensome in terms of arranging suitable dates/times and satisfactory group composition. Some staff also reported difficulties in mastering the psychological techniques. Uptake, by families, was influenced by the number of groups run and by school, work and other commitments. Attendees described improved: family relationships; knowledge and understanding; confidence; motivation to manage the disease. The results of the trial showed that the intervention did not significantly improve HbA1c at 12 or 24 months.

conclusionsClinic-based structured group education delivered by staff using psychological techniques had perceived benefits for parents and young people. Staff and families considered it a valuable intervention, yet uptake was poor and the burden on staff was high. Recommendations are made to inform issues related to organization, design, and delivery in order to potentially enhance the impact of CASCADE and future programs. CURRENT CONTROLLED TRIALS: ISRCTN52537669.

Indexed as

EducationPediatric DiabetesRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Methodologies

Identifiers

PMID25969740
PMCPMC4419460
OpenAlexW2030252729

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.