Observational studyEndocrine2016
Evaluation of patient-reported outcomes data in structured diabetes education intervention: 2-year follow-up data of patient empowerment programme.
Observational study in Endocrine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01935349 (Evaluation of Quality of Care - Patient Empowerment Programme, HA), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Evaluation of Quality of Care - Patient Empowerment Programme, HA
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Randomised Controlled Feasibility Trial of Face-To-Face Diabetes Self-Management Education Shows High Completion Rates Are Needed to Improve Patient-Reported Outcomes.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Trial
- Real-world completion of diabetes self management education and its impact on patient-reported outcomes: A scoping review.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the chronic disease co-care (CDCC) Pilot Scheme: a study protocol.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- The comparison of self-management group education and the standard care for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Review
- Defining an enabling environment for those with chronic disease: an integrative review.BMC nursing · 2021Article
- Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary risk assessment and management programme-diabetes mellitus (RAMP-DM) on patient-reported outcomes.Endocrine · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To examine the effects of a structured group-based education programme, patient empowerment programme (PEP), compared with usual care on 2-year changes in patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). A prospective observational study of 715 patients (PEP/non-PEP: 390/325) was conducted to complete the baseline PRO survey and followed up for 2 years. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) was measured using the short-form 12 at baseline and annually at two follow-up assessments, which yielded physical and mental component summary and SF-6D preference-based scores. Perceived control over diabetes and general health status were measured using the patient enablement instrument (PEI) and global rating scale (GRS) at follow-ups. When compared with non-PEP, PEP participants significantly reported improvement in health condition (GRS score > 0; 24.55 % vs 10.16 %; odds ratio = 2.502; P = 0.018) in 2 years and enabled the self-perceived control over diabetes (PEI score > 0; 72.20 % vs 38.40 %; odds ratio = 3.25; P < 0.001) in 1-year follow-up but no sustained effects in year 2 (52.65 % vs 39.04 %; odds ratio = 1.366; P = 0.265). There were no significant differences between PEP and non-PEP groups in the changes in quality of life scores (all P > 0.05) at 1 year. Although HRQOL scores deteriorated over 2-year period in both groups, PEP participants reported similar changes in HRQOL scores to that of non-PEP. PEP for DM patients preserved self-perceived disease control and health condition, whereas PEP participants perceived their HRQOL similar to that of non-PEP participants. Findings of PRO should be considered alongside clinical outcomes when evaluating the overall benefits of PEP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.