Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26808489›Full record

Trial reportMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2016

Peer Support Training Improved the Glycemic Control, Insulin Management, and Diabetic Behaviors of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in Rural Communities of Central China: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Kaiqin Deng, Yanlei Ren, Zhongmei Luo, Kun Du, Xiaoqin Zhang, Qiong Zhang

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Developing "Aryan:" Diabetes Self-care Mobile Application.International journal of preventive medicine · 2019
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 2017 National Standards for Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2017
    Article
  15. 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

6 authors.

Kaiqin DengDepartment of Endocrinology, Jingzhou First People's Hospital, Jingzhou, Hubei, China (mainland).
Yanlei RenDepartment of Nursing, Jingzhou First People's Hospital, Jingzhou, Hubei, China (mainland).
Zhongmei LuoSurgery Room, Jingzhou First People's Hospital, Jingzhou, Hubei, China (mainland).
Kun DuClinical Laboratory, Jingzhou First People's Hospital, Jingzhou, Hubei, China (mainland).
Xiaoqin ZhangDepartment of Endocrinology, Jingzhou First People's Hospital, Jingzhou, Hubei, China (mainland).
Qiong ZhangDepartment of General Surgery, Jingzhou First People's Hospital, Jingzhou, Hubei, China (mainland).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe efficacy of peer support in Chinese diabetes patients is still uncertain. The purpose of this study was to observe the effects of a peer support program on the outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes who received community-based insulin therapy in rural communities of central China. MATERIAL/

methodsTwo hundred and eight eligible patients with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned into the traditional training group (control group, n=111) and peer support intervention group (peer group, n=97) between June 2013 and January 2014 in 2 rural communities of Jingzhou area, China. Both groups received 3-month traditional training, followed by another 4-month traditional training or peer support training, respectively. At baseline and 7 months after treatment, the blood glycemic level was evaluated by biochemical detection. Capacities of self-management and knowledge related to insulin usage were assessed by questionnaire survey.

resultsNinety-seven and ninety patients completed this study in the control group and peer group, respectively. There was no significant difference in age, gender, diabetes duration, insulin usage time, and complications between the 2 groups at baseline (P>0.05). Compared with the control group, peer group patients achieved a more significant decrease in blood glycosylated hemoglobin levels (P<0.05), increase in knowledge related to insulin usage, and increase of diabetes self-management ability (P<0.05).

conclusionsPeer support intervention effectively improves outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes in rural communities of central China.

Indexed as

Peer GroupRural PopulationSelf-Help GroupsAdultAgedAwarenessChinaDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansHyperglycemiaInsulinMaleMiddle AgedInsulin

Identifiers

PMID26808489
PMCPMC4732547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.