ArticleBMJ open2019
Use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical diabetes consultations: study protocol for the DiaPROM randomised controlled trial pilot study.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03471104 (The Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
The Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) to Promote Quality of Clinical Diabetes Consultations
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychosocial-Spiritual Experiences and Outcomes in Parents of Children with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus from the Middle East and North Africa Region: A Systematic Review.Pediatric diabetes · 2024Pooled it
- Use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical diabetes consultations: the DiaPROM randomised controlled pilot trial.BMJ open · 2021Trial
- Establishing the Australian National Endometriosis Clinical and Scientific Trials (NECST) Registry: A protocol paper.Reproduction & fertility · 2023Article
- Implementing the Digital Diabetes Questionnaire as a Clinical Tool in Routine Diabetes Care: Focus Group Discussions With Patients and Health Care Professionals.JMIR diabetes · 2022Article
- Observational
- Interprofessional Collaboration and Diabetes Management in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Patients' Satisfaction by SmileInHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
- Electronic capturing of patient-reported outcome measures on a touchscreen computer in clinical diabetes practice (the DiaPROM trial): a feasibility study.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2019Article
- An investigation of methods to improve recall for the patient-reported outcome measurement in COPD patients: a pilot randomised control trial and feasibility study protocol.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough diabetes distress is found to be associated with decreased glycaemic control among adults with type 1 diabetes, the psychological and emotional impact of living with the condition is often not recognised and often under-reported in diabetes care. Therefore, regular assessment of diabetes distress is recommended. Assessment of diabetes distress using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical practice has the potential to enhance care for people with diabetes by identifying problems and improving patient-clinician communication. In this study protocol, we describe a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) aiming to test the feasibility of all components of an empowerment-based intervention using PROMs as dialogue support in clinical diabetes consultations, and to address the uncertainties associated with running a fully powered evaluation study. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will undertake a two-arm pilot RCT of an intervention using the Problem Areas In Diabetes (PAID) scale in clinical diabetes consultations in order to conclude whether a fully powered trial is appropriate and/or feasible. The study will also include qualitative indepth interviews with participants and healthcare providers. Our objectives are to (1) evaluate the recruitment procedures and attrition rates; (2) evaluate the performance of the randomisation procedure; (3) evaluate the participants' mean scores on the outcome measures before and after the intervention; (4) evaluate if the intervention consultations are acceptable and feasible; and (5) explore patients' and healthcare providers' experiences with the use of PAID as dialogue support and empowerment-based communication skills in clinical diabetes consultations. The quantitative data analysis includes descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages, means, SD and CI). For the qualitative data, we will perform thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Western Norway Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (2017/1506/REC west). We will present the findings from the study phases at national and international conferences and submit manuscripts to peer-reviewed journals and popular science journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03471104; Pre-results.
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.