Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26130465›Full record

SynthesisEvaluation & the health professions2016

Measuring Self-Care in Persons With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review.

Yan Lu, Jiayun Xu, Weigang Zhao, Hae-Ra Han

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Evaluation & the health professions, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Instruments Measuring Self-Care and Self-Management of Chronic Conditions by Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Scoping Review.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2023
    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

4 authors.

Yan LuSchool of Nursing, China Medical University, Shenyang City, Liaoning Province, People's Republic of China.
Jiayun XuDepartment of Community-Public Health, Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Weigang ZhaoEndocrinology Department, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Hae-Ra HanDepartment of Community-Public Health, Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD, USA hhan3@jhu.edu.

Funding

Training in Health Disparities of Underserved PopulationT32NR007968 · NINR · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI ALLEN, JERILYN K · 2002 to 2011
$2.0M
Translation CoreP30NR011409 · NINR · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI HAN, HAE-RA · 2009 to 2012
$1.8M
HF Patient Decision Making Prior to RehospitalizationF31NR014750 · NINR · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI XU, JIAYUN · 2013 to 2015
$80k
NINR NIH HHS F31 NR014750NINR NIH HHS P30 NR011409NINR NIH HHS T32 NR007968
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review examines the characteristics and psychometric properties of the instruments used to assess self-care behaviors among persons with type 2 diabetes. Electronic databases were searched for relevant studies published in English within the past 20 years. Thirty different instruments were identified in 75 articles: 18 original instruments on type 2 diabetes mellitus self-care, 8 translated or revised version, and 4 not specific but relevant to diabetes. Twenty-one instruments were multidimensional and addressed multiple dimensions of self-care behavior. Nine were unidimensional: three focusing exclusively on medication taking, three on diet, one on physical activity, one on self-monitoring of blood glucose, and one on oral care. Most instruments (22 of 30) were developed during the last decade. Only 10 were repeated more than once. Nineteen of the 30 instruments reported both reliability and validity information but with varying degrees of rigor. In conclusion, most instruments used to measure self-care were relatively new and had been applied to only a limited number of studies with incomplete psychometric profiles. Rigorous psychometric testing, operational definition of self-care, and sufficient explanation of scoring need to be considered for further instrument development.

Indexed as

Diabetes ComplicationsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2DietExerciseHealth BehaviorHumansMedication AdherenceProgram EvaluationPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSelf CareSurveys and Questionnairesinstrumentself-careself-reporttype 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID26130465
PMCPMC4792777

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.