ArticleAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2022
Predictors and Effects of Participation in Peer Support: A Prospective Structural Equation Modeling Analysis.
Article in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes Summit Recommendations on Implementation of Diabetes Management in CKD: From Primary to Data-Driven Collaborative Care.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Financial toxicity-related factors in patients with nasopharyngeal carfcinoma: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Development of new bilingual oral health behavior social support (OHBSS) scales in English and Spanish.PloS one · 2025Article
- Patient-centered care in diabetes care-concepts, relationships and practice.World journal of diabetes · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeer support provides varied health benefits, but how it achieves these benefits is not well understood. PURPOSE: Examine a) predictors of participation in peer support interventions for diabetes management, and b) relationship between participation and glycemic control.
methodsSeven peer support interventions funded through Peers for Progress provided pre/post data on 1,746 participants' glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c), contacts with peer supporters as an indicator of participation, health literacy, availability/satisfaction with support for diabetes management from family and clinical team, quality of life (EQ-Index), diabetes distress, depression (PHQ-8), BMI, gender, age, education, and years with diabetes.
resultsStructural equation modeling indicated a) lower levels of available support for diabetes management, higher depression scores, and older age predicted more contacts with peer supporters, and b) more contacts predicted lower levels of final HbA1c as did lower baseline levels of BMI and diabetes distress and fewer years living with diabetes. Parallel effects of contacts on HbA1c, although not statistically significant, were observed among those with baseline HbA1c values > 7.5% or > 9%. Additionally, no, low, moderate, and high contacts showed a significant linear, dose-response relationship with final HbA1c. Baseline and covariate-adjusted, final HbA1c was 8.18% versus 7.86% for those with no versus high contacts.
conclusionsPeer support reached/benefitted those at greater disadvantage. Less social support for dealing with diabetes and higher PHQ-8 scores predicted greater participation in peer support. Participation in turn predicted lower HbA1c across levels of baseline HbA1c, and in a dose-response relationship across levels of participation.
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.