Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33052121›Full record

ArticleJournal of participatory medicine2018

Codesigned Shared Decision-Making Diabetes Management Plan Tool for Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and Their Parents: Prototype Development and Pilot Test.

Tamara S Hannon, Courtney M Moore, Erika R Cheng, Dustin O Lynch, Lisa G Yazel-Smith, Gina Em Claxton, Aaron E Carroll, Sarah E Wiehe

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of participatory medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The Many Faces of Engagement: A Scoping Review of Paediatric Patient and Family Engagement in Clinical Care, Education and Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. A framework for involving coproduction partners in research about young people with type 1 diabetes.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tamara S HannonPediatric and Adolescent Comparative Effectiveness Research, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8792-4278
Courtney M MooreCommunity Health Partnerships Patient Engagement Core, Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3563-0259
Erika R ChengChildren's Health Services Research Center, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8289-5087
Dustin O LynchCommunity Health Partnerships Patient Engagement Core, Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1356-1192
Lisa G Yazel-SmithPediatric and Adolescent Comparative Effectiveness Research, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5280-4655
Gina Em ClaxtonCommunity Health Partnerships Patient Engagement Core, Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5494-2170
Aaron E CarrollPediatric and Adolescent Comparative Effectiveness Research, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2699-4707
Sarah E WieheChildren's Health Services Research Center, Department of Pediatrics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8148-0848
Indiana University Health · USIndiana University School of Medicine

Funding

Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteUL1TR001108 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$23.3M
Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteKL2TR001106 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$3.2M
Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences InstituteTL1TR001107 · NCATS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI DENNE, SCOTT C., SHEKHAR, ANANTHA · 2013 to 2017
$2.0M
AHRQ HHS R24 HS022434NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR001106NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001107NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001108
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus have difficulty achieving optimal glycemic control, partly due to competing priorities that interfere with diabetes self-care. Often, significant diabetes-related family conflict occurs, and adolescents' thoughts and feelings about diabetes management may be disregarded. Patient-centered diabetes outcomes may be better when adolescents feel engaged in the decision-making process.

objectiveThe objective of our study was to codesign a clinic intervention using shared decision making for addressing diabetes self-care with an adolescent patient and parent advisory board.

methodsThe patient and parent advisory board consisted of 6 adolescents (teens) between the ages 12 and 18 years with type 1 diabetes mellitus and their parents recruited through our institution's Pediatric Diabetes Program. Teens and parents provided informed consent and participated in 1 or both of 2 patient and parent advisory board sessions, lasting 3 to 4 hours each. Session 1 topics were (1) patient-centered outcomes related to quality of life, parent-teen shared diabetes management, and shared family experiences; and (2) implementation and acceptability of a patient-centered diabetes care plan intervention where shared decision making was used. We analyzed audio recordings, notes, and other materials to identify and extract ideas relevant to the development of a patient-centered diabetes management plan. These data were visually coded into similar themes. We used the information to develop a prototype for a diabetes management plan tool that we pilot tested during session 2.

resultsSession 1 identified 6 principal patient-centered quality-of-life measurement domains: stress, fear and worry, mealtime struggles, assumptions and judgments, feeling abnormal, and conflict. We determined 2 objectives to be principally important for a diabetes management plan intervention: (1) focusing the intervention on diabetes distress and conflict resolution strategies, and (2) working toward a verbalized common goal. In session 2, we created the diabetes management plan tool according to these findings and will use it in a clinical trial with the aim of assisting with patient-centered goal setting.

conclusionsPatients with type 1 diabetes mellitus can be effectively engaged and involved in patient-centered research design. Teens with type 1 diabetes mellitus prioritize reducing family conflict and fitting into their social milieu over health outcomes at this time in their lives. It is important to acknowledge this when designing interventions to improve health outcomes in teens with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Indexed as

adolescent health servicesdiabetes mellitus, type 1patient-centered careresearch designself-management

Identifiers

PMID33052121
PMCPMC7434065
OpenAlexW2802681265

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.