ArticleBMC nursing2024
Supporting self-management in women with pre-existing diabetes in pregnancy: a mixed-methods sequential comparative case study.
Article in BMC nursing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The relationship between self-efficacy and prenatal depression in Chinese pregnant women: a parallel latent growth curve model.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Perceptions of mindfulness to pregnant women with gestational diabetes: an exploratory qualitative Portuguese study.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMaternal glycemia is associated with pregnancy outcomes. Thus, supporting the self-management experiences and preferences of pregnant women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes is crucial to optimize glucose control and perinatal outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsThis paper describes the mixed methods integration of a sequential comparative case study. The objectives are threefold, as we integrated the quantitative and qualitative data within the overall mixed methods design: (1) to determine the predictors of glycemic control during pregnancy; (2) to understand the experience and diabetes self-management support needs during pregnancy among women with pre-existing diabetes; (3) to assess how self-management and support experiences helpe to explain glycemic control among women with pre-existing diabetes in pregnancy. The purpose of the mixing was to integrate the quantitative and qualitative data to develop rich descriptive cases of how diabetes self-management and support experiences and preferences in women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes during pregnancy help explain glucose control. A narrative approach was used to weave together the statistics and themes and the quantitative results were integrated visually alongside the qualitative themes to display the data integration.
resultsThe quantitative results found that women achieved "at target" glucose control (mean A1C of the cohort by the third visit: 6.36% [95% Confidence Interval 6.11%, 6.60%]). The qualitative findings revealed that feelings of fear resulted in an isolating and mentally exhausting pregnancy. The quantitative data also indicated that women reported high levels of self-efficacy that increased throughout pregnancy. Qualitative data revealed that women who had worked hard to optimize glycemia during pregnancy were confident in their self-management. However, they lacked support from their healthcare team, particularly around self-management of diabetes during labour and delivery.
conclusionsThe achievement of optimal glycemia during pregnancy was motivated by fear of pregnancy complications and came at a cost to women's mental health. Mental health support, allowing women autonomy, and the provision of peer support may improve the experience of diabetes self-management during pregnancy. Future work should focus on developing, evaluating and implementing interventions that support these preferences.
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.