SynthesisBMJ open diabetes research & care2019
Incorporating patients' perspectives into the initial stages of core outcome set development: a rapid review of qualitative studies of type 2 diabetes.
Synthesis in BMJ open diabetes research & care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Patient perceptions of outcomes used to evaluate in-hospital handover interventions: a rapid review of qualitative data.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- Patients' and informal caregivers' perspectives on self-management interventions for type 2 diabetes mellitus outcomes: a mixed-methods overview of 14 years of reviews.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023Pooled it
- Incorporating patient perspectives in the development of a core outcome set for reproductive genetic carrier screening: a sequential systematic review.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Developing a core outcome set for intervention studies in post stroke cognitive impairment (COS-PSCI): a protocol.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Article
- What matters most to people living with epilepsy? A rapid review of qualitative research relating to health outcomes.Epilepsia · 2025Review
- Article
- Clinical Patient-Relevant Outcome Domains for Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome-A Scoping Review and Expert Panels.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Patient-reported outcomes for people with diabetes: what and how to measure? A narrative review.Diabetologia · 2023Review
- Health system responses for type 1 diabetes: A scoping review.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2022Article
- The standards of obstetrics and gynecology core outcome sets: A scoping review.Integrative medicine research · 2022Article
- The Perspectives of Patients with Chronic Diseases and Their Caregivers on Self-Management Interventions: A Scoping Review of Reviews.The patient · 2021Article
- The Core Outcome DEvelopment for Carrier Screening (CODECS) study: protocol for development of a core outcome set.Trials · 2021Article
- Involving people with type 2 diabetes in facilitating participation in a cardiovascular screening programme.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Facilitating participation in cardiovascular preventive initiatives among people with diabetes: a qualitative study.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Comparing the Preferences of Patients and the General Public for Treatment Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.The patient · 2021Article
- Scout - sarcoidosis outcomes taskforce. A systematic review of outcomes to inform the development of a core outcome set for pulmonary sarcoidosis.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2021Article
- Patients' and parents' views about lower limb orthopaedic surgery for ambulant children and young people with cerebral palsy: a qualitative evidence synthesis.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Conducting systematic reviews of qualitative studies to incorporate patient perspectives within the early stages of core outcome set (COS) development can be resource intensive. We aimed to identify an expedited approach to be used as part of the wider COS development process. Specifically, we undertook a rapid review of qualitative studies of patients' views and experiences of type 2 diabetes. We searched MEDLINE from inception to June 2017 to identify studies reporting qualitative empirical findings of perspectives of people with type 2 diabetes. Qualitative methodological filters were used to minimize irrelevant references. Drawing on content analysis, data synthesis involved identifying text in eligible studies relevant to outcomes of type 2 diabetes and interpreting and categorizing this according to the 38 core domains of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials taxonomy. Of 146 studies screened, 26 were included. Four hundred and fifty-eight outcomes were derived from the included studies. In comparison to the outcomes extracted from clinical trials, more life impact outcomes were derived from the qualitative studies, but fewer physiological/clinical outcomes. Outcomes relating to 'mortality/survival' and 'role functioning' were more prevalent in studies conducted in low/middle-income countries. This rapid review and synthesis of qualitative studies identified outcomes that had not previously been identified by a systematic review of clinical trials. It also identified differences in the types of outcomes given prominence to in the clinical trials and qualitative literatures. Incorporating qualitative evidence on patient perspectives from the outset of the COS development process can help to ensure outcomes that matter to patients are not overlooked. Our method provides a pragmatic and resource-efficient way to do this. For those developing international COS, our method has potential for incorporating the perspectives of patients from diverse countries in the early stages of COS development.
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.