Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30012812›Full record

Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2018

Nurse-led psychological intervention for type 2 diabetes: a cluster randomised controlled trial (Diabetes-6 study) in primary care.

Khalida Ismail, Kirsty Winkley, Nicole de Zoysa, Anita Patel, Margaret Heslin, Helen Graves, Stephen Thomas, Dominic Stringer, Daniel Stahl, Stephanie A Amiel

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. How effective are CBT and CBT-based interventions in Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes? An umbrella review.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

10 authors.

Khalida IsmailInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London.
Kirsty WinkleyInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London.
Nicole de ZoysaDiabetes Centre, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London.
Anita PatelInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London.
Margaret HeslinInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London.
Helen GravesInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London.
Stephen ThomasGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London.
Dominic StringerInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London.
Daniel StahlInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London.
Stephanie A AmielDivision of Diabetes and Nutritional Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSuboptimal glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes (T2D) is common and associated with psychological barriers.

aimTo investigate whether it was possible to train practice nurses in six psychological skills (Diabetes-6 [D6]) based on motivational interviewing (MI) and basic cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), and whether integrating these with diabetes care was associated with improved glycaemic control over 18 months compared with standard care. DESIGN AND

settingTwo-arm, single-blind, parallel cluster randomised controlled trial in primary care.

methodAdult participants (

resultsUsing intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference between D6 intervention and standard care in HbA1c (mean difference -0.79 mmol/mol, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -5.75 to 4.18) or for any of the secondary outcomes. The competency level of D6 nurses was below the beginner proficiency level and similar to the standard-care nurses.

conclusionTraining nurses in MI and basic CBT to support self-management did not lead to improvements in glycaemic control or other secondary outcomes in people with T2D at 18 months. It was also unlikely to be cost-effective. Furthermore, the increased contact with standard-care nurses did not improve glycaemic control.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyMotivational InterviewingPrimary Health CareAdultAgedBlood GlucoseCluster AnalysisCost-Benefit AnalysisDepressionDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2EnglandFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansMaleMiddle AgedBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humancognitive therapyhyperglycaemiamotivational interviewingself-managementtype 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID30012812
PMCPMC6058638

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.