ArticleBMJ open2024
Impact of COVID-19 on diabetes care: mixed methods study in an Indigenous area of Guatemala.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating COVID-19 impact, vaccination, birth registration, and underreporting in a predominantly indigenous population in Chiapas, Mexico.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 7 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSARS-CoV-2 has impacted globally the care of chronic diseases. However, direct evidence from certain vulnerable communities, such as Indigenous communities in Latin America, is missing. We use observational data from a health district that primarily serves people of Maya K'iche' ethnicity to examine the care of type 2 diabetes in Guatemala during the pandemic.
methodsWe used a parallel convergent mixed methods design. Quantitative data (n=142 individuals with diabetes) included glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure, body mass index and questionnaires on diabetes knowledge, self-care and diabetes distress. Quantitative data was collected at two points, at baseline and after COVID restrictions were lifted. For quantitative outcomes, we constructed multilevel mixed effects models with multiple imputation for missing data. Qualitative data included interviews with providers, supervisors and individuals living with diabetes (n=20). We conducted thematic framework analysis using an inductive approach.
resultsQuantitative data was collected between June 2019 and February 2021, with a median of 487 days between data collection points. HbA1c worsened +0.54% (95% CI, 0.14 to 0.94) and knowledge about diabetes decreased -3.54 points (95% CI, -4.56 to -2.51). Qualitatively, the most important impact of the pandemic was interruption of the regular timing of home visits and peer group meetings which were the standard of care.
conclusionsThe deterioration of diabetes care was primarily attributed to the loss of regular contact with healthcare workers. The results emphasize the vulnerability of rural and Indigenous populations in Latin America to the suspension of chronic disease care.
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.