ArticlePatient preference and adherence2018
Patient engagement in type 2 diabetes mellitus research: what patients want.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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.
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.
- A Novel User Utility Score for Diabetes Management Using Tailored Mobile Coaching: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Trial
- 'The seagull theory: Where people fly in, gather information… fly out and nothing ever comes about': A qualitative exploration of barriers and enablers to research participation among adults with type 2 diabetes living in Australian rural communities.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2025Article
- Measuring Outcomes for Community Partner Engagement: The Case of the High-Fidelity Wraparound Program for Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2025Article
- Identifying research priorities and essential elements of palliative care services for people facing malignant brain tumors: A participatory co-design approach.Neuro-oncology practice · 2024Article
- Multidisciplinary stakeholder engagement in a type 2 diabetes comparative effectiveness study utilizing real-world data.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Diabetes-related research priorities of people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study in Germany.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Formative Qualitative Research: Design Considerations for a Self-Directed Lifestyle Intervention for Type-2 Diabetes Patients Using Human-Centered Design Principles in Benin.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Goals of cure: Perspectives on the concept of cure in type 2 diabetes.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2022Article
- Patient and Family Advisory Councils for Research: Recruiting and Supporting Members From Diverse and Hard-to-Reach Communities.The Journal of nursing administration · 2019Article
- Patient stakeholder engagement in research: A narrative review to describe foundational principles and best practice activities.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Review
- What Are Diabetes Patients Versus Health Care Personnel Discussing on Social Media?Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2019Article
- Preferences and interests of diabetes social media users regarding a health-promotion intervention.Patient preference and adherence · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs patients are the ultimate stakeholder in their health, their perspectives should be included along with researchers, providers, and funders of research design, execution, and interpretation. Despite the high prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), patients are rarely directly included in these decisions. PURPOSE: We sought to determine areas of research most important to patients with T2DM, identify ways through which patients with T2DM want to engage in research, and evaluate online patient research networks as a source for obtaining patient perspectives on research engagement. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis study used an online patient community forum (PatientsLikeMe) to host two asynchronous moderated discussions, each with three to four prompted discussion posts. A qualitative summary of themes was derived from the posts.
resultsEighty-eight participants with T2DM took part. Participants were mostly white (86%), averaged 58.6 years of age, half were female (50%), and over half (62%) resided in the US. Research priorities included managing T2DM with comorbidities, controlling blood sugar levels, finding a cure, and understanding causes of T2DM. Participants wanted to see direct applications of research to their lives. Clinical research was perceived to have overly restrictive eligibility criteria and to measure outcome sets that do not adequately address patient health concerns. Participants indicated broad interest in partnering in research and a willingness to apply their skills and educational background to specific stages in the research process.
conclusionPatients with T2DM would like researchers to address outcomes that have meaning in patients' daily lives. Initiatives to involve patients in research should leverage and enable patients to contribute as participants, advisors, or co-investigators, going beyond research topic prioritization to full participation throughout the research process based on their abilities and interest. This study provides support for the use of online patient research network discussions to generate rich qualitative data to engage patients in research.
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.