The diabetes community exercise programme plus usual care versus usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomised, two-arm, parallel, open-label trial.

L Hale, C Higgs, A R Gray, J Mann, R Mani, T Sullivan, J Terry, D Keen, T Stokes

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it

–field-weighted citation impact

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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

9 authors.

L HaleCentre of Health, Activity and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, 325 Great King Street, Dunedin 9016, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand.

C HiggsCentre of Health, Activity and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, 325 Great King Street, Dunedin 9016, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand.

A R GrayBiostatistics Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand.

J MannDepartment of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

R ManiCentre of Health, Activity and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, 325 Great King Street, Dunedin 9016, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand.

T SullivanDepartment of Preventive and Social Medicine, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

J TerryCentre of Health, Activity and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, 325 Great King Street, Dunedin 9016, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand.

D KeenCentre of Health, Activity and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, 325 Great King Street, Dunedin 9016, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand.

T StokesDepartment of General Practice and Rural Health, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Exercise is important in type 2 diabetes (T2D) management. Focussing on Māori and Pacific people and those from deprived circumstances, the Diabetes Community Exercise Programme (DCEP) was developed to engage people with T2D in exercise. We report the evaluation of whether being offered DCEP (plus usual care) was more effective than usual care in improving glycaemic control at 1-year. Methods: A randomised, two-arm, parallel, open-label trial with blinding of outcome assessor and data analyst. Adults (age ≥35 years) with T2D recruited from two New Zealand (NZ) communities were randomised, using opaque sealed envelopes and stratified by centre with random block lengths, to DCEP or usual care. DCEP comprises twice-weekly, two-hour sessions of exercise and education over 12-weeks, followed by a twice-weekly maintenance exercise class. The primary outcome was between-group differences in mean changes of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to 1-year follow-up with intention-to treat analysis. This trial is registered with the Australian NZ Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12617001624370p and is closed to new participants. Findings: From 2018 - 2019, of 294 people screened, 165 (mean age 63·8, SD16·2 years, 56% female, 78·5% European, 14% Māori, 6% Pacific, 27% most deprived) were baseline evaluated, randomised, and analysed at study end (DCEP = 83, control = 82). Multimorbidity (≥2) and polypharmacy (>5 medications) were high (82%, 69%). We found no statistically significant between-groups differences in HbA1c (mmol/mol) change at 15 months (mean 3% higher in DCEP, 95% CI 2% lower to 8% higher, Interpretation: DCEP was not effective in improving glycaemic control, possibly due to insufficient exercise intensity. Our attendance demonstrated DCEP's cultural accessibility. DCEP might be good to engage in exercise marginalised people with high Hb1Ac levels, multimorbidity, and high polypharmacy. Funding: Health Research Council of New Zealand.

Indexed as

EducationEthnicityExerciseHealth equitySelf-management supportType 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID35360148

DOI10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101361

PMCPMC8961191

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY-NC-ND

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.