Trial reportJournal of pediatric psychology2019
Adaptation of an Evidence-Based Diabetes Management Intervention for Delivery in Community Settings: Findings From a Pilot Randomized Effectiveness Trial.
Trial report in Journal of pediatric psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Parenting interventions for parents of children with type 1 diabetes-a systematic review.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2025Pooled it
- Benefits, implementation and sustainability of innovative paediatric models of care for children with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review.BMC pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- The Effects of Diabetes Self-Management Education on Quality of Life for Persons With Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.The science of diabetes self-management and care · 2022Pooled it
- Psychological interventions for parents of children and adolescents with chronic illness.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- An RCT of a family intervention for adolescents living with type 1 diabetes: Who benefits most?Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026Trial
- Mindfulness-based group intervention for adolescents with type 1 diabetes: initial findings from a pilot and feasibility randomized controlled trial.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2024Trial
- Mapping Randomized Controlled Trials of Family- and Community-Centered Healthcare Interventions for Pediatric Asthma, Type 1 Diabetes, or Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis-A Scoping Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Application of Supply Processing and Distribution Model in Interventional Consumables Management Based on Whole-Process Coding Technology.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- The use of implementation science theoretical approaches in hybrid effectiveness-implementation type 1 randomised trials of healthcare interventions: A scoping review.Implementation science : IS · 2025Article
- Health system responses for type 1 diabetes: A scoping review.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2022Article
- Optimizing Recruitment of Black Adolescents into Behavioral Research: A Multi-Center Study.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2021Article
- A Primer on Mixed Methods for Pediatric Researchers.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To adapt an evidence-based intervention targeting diabetes management in adolescents with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes for use in a community setting by community health workers (CHWs) and to conduct pilot testing of the new intervention, REACH for Control (RFC). The study was conducted as a collaboration between university researchers and a federally qualified health center. Methods In a pilot effectiveness trial, feasibility and acceptability of RFC were evaluated based on participant enrollment, treatment dose, and consumer satisfaction. RFC effects on adolescent adherence, health outcomes, and quality of life were also assessed. The trial used a parallel group design. Families were randomized to 6 months of RFC plus standard medical care (n = 26) or standard care (SC) only (n = 24). Data were collected at baseline and 7-month posttest. A mixed-methods approach was used to analyze data. Results: Qualitative analyses suggested that caregivers viewed RFC and delivery of a home-based intervention by CHWs positively. Furthermore, adolescents who received RFC had statistically significant (p = .05) and clinically meaningful improvements in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (0.7%) and reported significant improvements in quality of life from baseline to follow-up (p = .001). No significant changes were found for adolescents in standard medical care. However, while dose of primary intervention session delivered was acceptable, dose of follow-up sessions used for skills practice was low. Conclusions: Results provide preliminary support for RFC's acceptability and effectiveness to improve health status and quality of life when used in community settings serving high-risk, low-income families. Additional testing in a full-scale effectiveness trial appears warranted.
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.