Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27623970›Full record

Observational studyEndocrine2016

Evaluation of patient-reported outcomes data in structured diabetes education intervention: 2-year follow-up data of patient empowerment programme.

Carlos K H Wong, Cindy L K Lam, Eric Y F Wan, Anca K C Chan, C H Pak, Frank W K Chan, William C W Wong

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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.

NCT01935349 completednot on this map

Evaluation of Quality of Care - Patient Empowerment Programme, HA

TypeobservationalSponsorThe University of Hong KongRan2010 to 2017Enrolled2,496ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Hypertension
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Carlos K H WongDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6895-6071
Cindy L K LamDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Eric Y F WanDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Anca K C ChanDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
C H PakDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Frank W K ChanIntegrated Care Programs, Hospital Authority Head Office, Hong Kong Hospital Authority, Hong Kong, China.
William C W WongDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Care, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. wongwcw@hku.hk.
University of Hong Kong · HKHong Kong Virtual University · CNHospital Authority · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Patient Education as TopicPatient ParticipationQuality of LifeSelf CareAgedDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealth EducationHealth StatusHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProspective StudiesPatient-reported outcomePrimary careQuality of lifeSelf-managementType 2 diabetes, Structured education

Identifiers

PMID27623970
OpenAlexW2520416196

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.