Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26179646›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2015

Effectiveness of community-based peer-led diabetes self-management programmes (COMP-DSMP) for improving clinical outcomes and quality of life of adults with diabetes in primary care settings in low and middle-income countries (LMIC): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mahmoud Werfalli, Peter Raubenheimer, Mark Engel, Nasheeta Peer, Sebastiana Kalula, Andre P Kengne, Naomi S Levitt

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT05336019 (Effectiveness of the Diabetes Self-management Coaching Program on the Clinical and Behavioral Parameters for Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes in the Ethiopian PC Setting), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT05336019 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness of the Diabetes Self-management Coaching Program on the Clinical and Behavioral Parameters for Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes in the Ethiopian PC Setting: Mixed-methods Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorQueen's UniversityRan2022 to 2023Enrolled40ConditionsType 2 Diabetes, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2ArmsDiabetes self-management Coaching, Usual care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The Effect of Peer Support on Foot Care in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery research
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mahmoud WerfalliDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, University of Cape Town, Chronic Disease Initiative for Africa, Cape town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Peter RaubenheimerDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Mark EngelDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Nasheeta PeerChronic Diseases of Lifestyle Research Unit, Durban, Durban, South Africa.
Sebastiana KalulaDepartment of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa Department of Geriatric Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, University of Cape Town, South Africa, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Andre P KengneSouth African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa.
Naomi S LevittDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, University of Cape Town, Chronic Disease Initiative for Africa, Cape town, Western Cape, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGlobally, an estimated 380 million people live with diabetes today--80% in low-income and middle-income countries. The Middle East, Western Pacific, Sub-Saharan Africa and South-East Asia remain the most affected regions where economic development has transformed lifestyles, people live longer and there is an increase in the adult population. Although peer support has been used in different conditions with varied results, yet there is limited evidence to date supporting its effectiveness, particularly for individuals with diabetes. In this review, we will focus on community-based peer-led diabetes self-management programmes (COMP-DSMP) and examine the implementation strategies and diabetes-related health outcomes associated with them in LMIC primary healthcare settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In accordance with reporting equity-focused systematic reviews PRISMA-P (preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols 2015 checklist) guidelines, a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised controlled trials (CCTs) that involve contact with an individual or group of peers (paid or voluntary). Electronic searches will be performed in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PubMed, SCOUPS, CINAHL and PsycINFO Database for the period January up to July 2000 along with manual searches in the reference lists of relevant papers. The analyses will be performed based on baseline data from RCTs, CCTs and preintervention and postintervention means or proportions will be reported for both intervention and control groups, and the absolute change from baseline will be calculated, together with 95% CIs. For dichotomous outcomes, the relative risk of the outcome will be presented compared to the control group. The risk difference will be calculated, which is the absolute difference in the proportions in each treatment group. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics is not required for this study, given that this is a protocol for a systematic review, which utilises published data. The findings of this study will be widely disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO (2014:CRD42014007531).

Indexed as

Developing CountriesPeer GroupPrimary Health CareQuality of LifeResidence CharacteristicsBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringDiabetes MellitusGlycated HemoglobinHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMedication AdherenceMotor ActivitySelf CareSelf EfficacyTreatment OutcomeBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanDIABETES & ENDOCRINOLOGYPRIMARY CAREPUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID26179646
PMCPMC4513536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.