ArticleObesity science & practice2022
Participants' perspectives on perceived usefulness of digital and in-person diabetes prevention programs: A qualitative study to inform decisions related to program participation.
Article in Obesity science & practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Weight loss and modeled cost savings in a digital diabetes prevention program.Obesity science & practice · 2023Article
- Mental health diagnosis attenuates weight loss among older adults in a digital diabetes prevention program.Obesity science & practice · 2023Article
- Participants' perspectives on perceived usefulness of digital and in-person diabetes prevention programs: A qualitative study to inform decisions related to program participation.Obesity science & practice · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Given the effectiveness of both in-person and digital diabetes prevention programs (DPPs), participants have an opportunity to select a delivery mode based on their needs and preferences. The objective of this study was to understand and compare participants' experiences with digital and in-person DPPs to identify factors that affected how useful participants perceived these two program delivery modes. Methods: Semi-structured interviews with participants who were enrolled in DPPs as either a digital ( Results: Findings from the interviews indicated that creating accountability for weight loss was crucial for all program participants. In the digital program, weight and food tracking played a central role in creating accountability, while in the in-person program, group interactions fostered accountability. The digital program was perceived to encourage self-monitoring, oftentimes resulting in participants' reflection on their habits. The in-person program provided a platform for group support and mutual encouragement. Conclusions: Participants perceived both programs as similarly useful. Yet program characteristics such as the ability to engage with other participants in-person or to seamlessly track weight on a daily basis appealed to different participants. It may be beneficial to align participants' preferences with programs' characteristics and strengths.
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.