Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30291066›Full record

ArticleJMIR diabetes2017

How's Your Sugar? Evaluation of a Website for Aboriginal People With Diabetes.

Karen Adams, Anna Liebzeit, Jennifer Browne, Petah Atkinson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR diabetes, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Definitions ofInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karen AdamsGukwonderuk, Faculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Science, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6990-6466
Anna LiebzeitMonash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7704-7833
Jennifer BrowneVictorian Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation, Collingwood, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6497-2541
Petah AtkinsonGukwonderuk, Faculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Science, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3168-4399
Monash University · AUVictorian Aboriginal Health Service · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAustralia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (hereafter referred to as "Aboriginal people") have the longest continuing culture in the world, living sustainably for at least 65,000 years on the Australian continent. In relatively recent times, colonization processes have resulted in Aboriginal people experiencing unacceptable health inequalities compared with other Australians. One disease introduced due to colonization is diabetes, the second leading cause of death for Aboriginal peoples.

objectivesThe objective of this study was to describe the construction and utilization of the website "How's Your Sugar, " a website for Aboriginal people with type 2 diabetes (herein after referred to as diabetes). The questions for the evaluation were as follows: how was the website constructed; did target groups utilize the website; and did engagement with the website improve diabetes management.

methodsA mixed-method study design was employed. A content analysis of project documents provided information about the website construction. Data from Google analytics provided information about website utilization. To describe patterns of website sessions, percentages and numbers were calculated. A voluntary survey provided more information on website utilization and diabetes self-management. Percentage, numbers, and 95% CIs were calculated for each variable. A chi-square test was performed for Aboriginal status, age, gender, and Aboriginal diabetic status using Australian population estimates and Aboriginal diabetes rates.

resultsThe website development drew on Aboriginal health, social marketing, interactive health promotion frameworks, as well as evidence for diabetes self-management. The website build involved a multidisciplinary team and participation of Aboriginal diabetics, Aboriginal diabetic family members, and Aboriginal health workers. This participation allowed for inclusion of Aboriginal ways of knowing and being. The highest number of website sessions came from Australia, 98.15% (47,717/48,617) and within Australia, Victoria 50.97% (24,323/47,717). There were 129 survey respondents, and the distribution had more female, 82.9% (107/129, 95% CI 76-88), Aboriginal, 21.7% (28/129, 95% CI 16-30), and Aboriginal diabetic, 48% (13/27, 95% CI 31-66) respondents than expected with P<.001 for these three groups. Most common reasons for visits were university assignment research, 40.6% (41/101), and health workers looking for information, 20.8% (21/101). The sample size was too small to calculate diabetes self-management change.

conclusionsInclusion of Aboriginal ways of knowing and being alongside other theoretical and evidence models in Web design is possible. Aboriginal people do utilize Web-based health promotion, and further understanding about reaching to this population would be of use. Provision of an education resource would likely have enhanced educational engagement. Web-based technologies are rapidly evolving, and these can potentially measure behavior change in engaging ways that also have benefits for the participant. A challenge for designers is inclusivity of cultural diversity for self-determination.

Indexed as

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoplesIndigenous populationsInternettype 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID30291066
PMCPMC6238832
OpenAlexW2604754271

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.