Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35523431›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2022

How do UK general practice staff understand and manage prediabetes? A focus group study.

Eleanor Barry, Trisha Greenhalgh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors.

Eleanor BarryDepartment of Primary Care Health Sciences, University Department in Oxford, Oxford, UK eleanor.barry@phc.ox.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1655-6516
Trisha GreenhalghDepartment of Primary Care Health Sciences, University Department in Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreventing type 2 diabetes is a national priority; one aspect is the identification and active management of 'prediabetes' through lifestyle change.

aimTo explore what primary care clinicians understood by 'prediabetes', how they communicated this diagnosis to people, how they delivered lifestyle advice, and their views on barriers to lifestyle change. DESIGN &

settingThree focus groups were undertaken with 25 individuals from primary care teams (GPs, nurses, and healthcare assistants) in Newham, a deprived and ethnically diverse part of London, UK.

methodRecordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically before integrating social and behavioural science theories.

resultsFocus groups participants described four main influences on their management of prediabetes in the consultation: social determinants, clinical aspects of diagnosis and management, patient motivation and behaviour change, and long-term care. Since most felt unable to address social determinants such as poverty, discussions with patients tended to focus on attempts to change individual behaviours and achieve particular numerical targets, with limited attention to the social context in which behaviours would play out.

conclusionType two diabetes prevention efforts in general practice may fail to address the upstream causes of this disease. A narrow focus on numerical targets and decontextualised behaviours overlooks the social complexity of human behaviour and lifestyle choices. Within the consultation, the authors recommend that greater attention is paid to discussing the social context and meaning of particular behaviours. Beyond the consultation, collaboration between primary care clinicians, public health bodies, and local governments is required to address community-level constraints to behaviour change.

Indexed as

DiabetesPreventionQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID35523431
PMCPMC9447313

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.