Trial reportPatient education and counseling2019
Effectiveness of DVD vs. group-initiated diabetes prevention on information uptake for high & low health literacy participants.
Trial report in Patient education and counseling, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- A randomized controlled trial to test the effectiveness of two technology-enhanced diabetes prevention programs in primary care: The DiaBEAT-it study.Frontiers in public health · 2023Trial
- A Scoping Review of Health Literacy Measurement in U.S. Interventions: Trends, Tools, and Gaps.Health literacy research and practice · 2026Article
- The Relationship Between Health Literacy Level and Metabolic Control Variables in People with Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Literature Review of Type 2 Diabetes Management and Health Literacy.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2021Article
- Understanding Teach-Back and Teach-To-Goal Strategies Embedded in Support Calls for a Health Literacy-Sensitive Childhood Obesity Treatment Trial.Health literacy research and practice · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study evaluates the effectiveness of technology versus in-person, group-initiated diabetes prevention to enhance comprehension of learning objectives between patients with differing health literacy (HL).
methodsEvidence-based content through either a DVD (n = 217) or in-person, group class (n = 225) to initiate the intervention. A teach-back call was used to assess comprehension of, and reinforce, learning objectives. Chi-squared was used to determine differences between conditions (DVD vs Class) and HL levels (High n = 361 vs. Low n = 81) and regression analyses were used to examine relationships.
resultsDVD participants performed significantly better across teach back questions (15.4 ± 2.5 v. 14.8 ± 2.6, p < 0.01), demonstrated comprehension in fewer teach-back rounds (1.9 ± 0.7 v. 2.1 ± 0.7, p < 0.01), and answered more questions correctly on the first try (4.2 ± 1.6 v. 3.4 ± 1.8, p < 0.01). Models for HL levels and modality by HL level were statistically significant (p < 0.01) favoring the DVD.
conclusionInitiating a diabetes prevention program with the use of a DVD appears to be a superior option to in-person, class sessions. Teach-back and teach-to-goal strategies enables participants of both high and low health literacy levels to receive and confirm mastery of diabetes prevention objectives. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: A teach-back call may improve information uptake increasing the likelihood of health behavior uptake.
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.