Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28694977›Full record

ArticleNursing open2017

Learning to practise the Guided Self-Determination approach in type 2 diabetes in primary care: A qualitative pilot study.

Bjørg Oftedal, Beate-Christin Hope Kolltveit, Vibeke Zoffmann, Åsa Hörnsten, Marit Graue

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Labeled as lucky: contradictions between what women and healthcare professionals experience regarding the need for help after the early stages of gynecological cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

5 authors.

Bjørg OftedalDepartment of Health Studies University of Stavanger Stavanger Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-6320-8509
Beate-Christin Hope KolltveitCentre for Evidence-Based Practice Bergen University College Bergen Norway.
Vibeke ZoffmannThe Research Unit Women's and Children's Health The Juliane Marie Centre Copenhagen University Hospital Copenhagen Denmark.
Åsa HörnstenDepartment of Nursing Umeå University Umeå Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-1543-6512
Marit GraueCentre for Evidence-Based Practice Bergen University College Bergen Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo describe how diabetes nurses in primary care experience the process of learning to practise the person-centred counselling approach Guided Self-Determination among adults with type 2 diabetes.

designA descriptive qualitative design.

methodData were collected in 2014-2015 by means of individual interviews with four diabetes nurses at two points in time. The data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

resultsThree themes that reflect nurses' processes in learning to use the Guided Self-Determination approach were identified: (1) from an unfamiliar interaction to "cracking the code"; (2) from an unspecific approach to a structured, reflective, but demanding approach; and (3) from a nurse-centred to a patient-centred approach. The overall findings indicate that the process of learning to practise Guided Self-Determination increased the nurses' counselling competence. Moreover, the nurses perceived the approach to be generally helpful, as it stimulated reflections about diabetes management and about their own counselling practices.

Identifiers

PMID28694977
PMCPMC5500461

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.