Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32505214›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2020

The effectiveness of peer and community health worker-led self-management support programs for improving diabetes health-related outcomes in adults in low- and-middle-income countries: a systematic review.

Mahmoud Werfalli, Peter J Raubenheimer, Mark Engel, Alfred Musekiwa, Kirsten Bobrow, Nasheeta Peer, Cecilia Hoegfeldt, Sebastiana Kalula, Andre Pascal Kengne, Naomi S Levitt

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Evaluating the implementation of group empowerment for people with type 2 diabetes at Grassy Park Community Day Centre, Cape Town: A convergent mixed-methods study.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Mahmoud WerfalliChronic Disease Initiative for Africa, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Peter J RaubenheimerDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, University of Cape Town, Observatory, Cape Town, Western Cape, 7935, South Africa.
Mark EngelDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, University of Cape Town, Observatory, Cape Town, Western Cape, 7935, South Africa.
Alfred MusekiwaChronic Diseases of Lifestyle Research Unit, Durban, Durban, South Africa.
Kirsten BobrowChronic Disease Initiative for Africa, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa.
Nasheeta PeerDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, University of Cape Town, Observatory, Cape Town, Western Cape, 7935, South Africa.
Cecilia HoegfeldtDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Sebastiana KalulaDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, University of Cape Town, Observatory, Cape Town, Western Cape, 7935, South Africa.
Andre Pascal KengneDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, University of Cape Town, Observatory, Cape Town, Western Cape, 7935, South Africa.
Naomi S LevittChronic Disease Initiative for Africa, Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa. Naomi.Levitt@uct.ac.za.ORCID 0000-0001-6480-8066
University of Cape Town · ZASouth African Medical Research Council · ZAUniversity of Oxford · GBWestern Cape Department of Health · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCommunity-based peer and community health worker-led diabetes self-management programs (COMP-DSMP) can benefit diabetes care, but the supporting evidence has been inadequately assessed. This systematic review explores the nature of COMP-DSMP in low- and middle-income countries' (LMIC) primary care settings and evaluates implementation strategies and diabetes-related health outcomes.

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed-MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL PsycINFO Database, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Clinicaltrials.gov, Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR), and HINARI (Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative) for studies that evaluated a COMP-DSMP in adults with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes in World Bank-defined LMIC from January 2000 to December 2019. Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials with at least 3 months follow-up and reporting on a behavioural, a primary psychological, and/or a clinical outcome were included. Implementation strategies were analysed using the standardised implementation framework by Proctor et al. Heterogeneity in study designs, outcomes, the scale of measurements, and measurement times precluded meta-analysis; thus, a narrative description of studies is provided.

resultsOf the 702 records identified, eleven studies with 6090 participants were included. COMP-DSMPs were inconsistently associated with improvements in clinical, behavioural, and psychological outcomes. Many of the included studies were evaluated as being of low quality, most had a substantial risk of bias, and there was a significant heterogeneity of the intervention characteristics (for example, peer definition, selection, recruitment, training and type, dose, and duration of delivered intervention), such that generalisation was not possible.

conclusionsThe level of evidence of this systematic review was considered low according to the GRADE criteria. The existing evidence however does show some improvements in outcomes. We recommend ongoing, but well-designed studies using a framework such as the MRC framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions to inform the evidence base on the contribution of COMP-DSMP in LMIC.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Self-ManagementAdultCommunity Health WorkersDeveloping CountriesHumansPeer Group

Identifiers

PMID32505214
PMCPMC7275531
OpenAlexW3032937570

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.