Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30575237›Full record

Trial reportPediatric diabetes2019

Exploring the role of motivational interviewing in adolescent patient-provider communication about type 1 diabetes.

Laura J Caccavale, Rosalie Corona, Jessica G LaRose, Suzanne E Mazzeo, Alexandra R Sova, Melanie K Bean

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Pediatric diabetes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Medication adherence in youths with CKD: habits for success.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2023
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Promoting High-Quality Health Communication Between Young Adults With Diabetes and Health Care Providers.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Laura J CaccavaleDepartment of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Richmond at Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.ORCID 0000-0003-2064-6119
Rosalie CoronaDepartment of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
Jessica G LaRoseDepartment of Health Behavior and Policy, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia.
Suzanne E MazzeoDepartment of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
Alexandra R SovaDepartment of Health Behavior and Policy, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia.
Melanie K BeanDepartment of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Richmond at Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
Virginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

Research Supplement to Promote Diversity in Health Related ResearchUL1TR002649 · NCATS · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI MOELLER, FREDERICK GERARD · 2018 to 2022
$19.1M
Center for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR000058 · NCATS · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI MOELLER, FREDERICK GERARD · 2012 to 2015
$12.5M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000058NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002649Virginia Commonwealth University's Honors College Summer Research Mentorship Program
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAdolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) frequently experience deterioration in glycemic control. Providers have unique opportunities to address diabetes self-management, yet little is known about the most effective way to communicate with adolescents. This investigation used a motivational interviewing (MI) framework to characterize naturally-occurring adolescent patient-provider communication in medical encounters and examined relations between adolescent patient-provider communication and (a) T1D self-management and (b) glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c]).

methodsMedical encounters between pediatric endocrine providers and 55 adolescents with T1D (49% female; M age = 14.8 years; M baseline HbA1c = 8.6%) were audio recorded and coded using standardized rating instruments. Patients and parents completed measures assessing T1D care behaviors and self-efficacy. Assessments were completed at routine endocrinology visits (baseline) and 1 and 3-month post-baseline; HbA1c was obtained from medical records at baseline and 3-month.

resultsHierarchical multiple regressions showed that greater provider use of MI non-adherent behaviors (eg, confronting, persuading) was associated with (a) poorer 3-month HbA1c, P < 0.001; (b) worse 1-month adolescent diabetes adherence P < 0.001, and (c) lower diabetes self-efficacy at 1-month (P < 0.001) follow-up. Lower patient self-efficacy for diabetes self-management mediated the relation between provider use of MI non-adherent language and lower diabetes adherence (P = 0.020).

conclusionProviders' use of persuasion and confrontation regarding risks of non-adherence was associated with poorer glycemic control and adherence. Communication training for providers that targets reductions in MI-inconsistent language may have the potential to improve diabetes self-care in this vulnerable population.

Indexed as

CommunicationDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Motivational InterviewingPhysician-Patient RelationsAdolescentBlood GlucoseFemaleHumansHypoglycemic AgentsMaleMedication AdherencePatient Education as TopicPatient ParticipationSelf EfficacySelf-ManagementBlood GlucoseHypoglycemic Agentsadolescentscommunicationmotivational interviewingtype 1 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID30575237
PMCPMC7196323
OpenAlexW2735000634

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.