Trial reportAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2025
Diabetes-specific family functioning typology associated with intervention engagement and effects: secondary analyses from a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04347291 (Mobile Phone Support for Adults and Support Persons to Live Well With Diabetes), which is not on this 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.
Mobile Phone Support for Adults and Support Persons to Live Well With Diabetes
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A qualitative analysis of family experiences across diabetes-specific family functioning types during a family-focused intervention for adults with type 2 diabetes.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundObservationally, family and social support are important for optimal diabetes self-management; however, interventions targeting family/social support have not consistently been effective. A novel, diabetes-specific family functioning typology offers the opportunity to classify types of baseline family functioning to determine for whom family interventions may be effective. PURPOSE: We examined the effects of an intervention by baseline type of family functioning post hoc, to inform differential benefit from interventions.
methodsParticipants were randomized to enhanced treatment as usual or a 9-month, mobile phone-delivered, family-focused, self-care support intervention. Adults with type 2 diabetes (N = 318) who participated in the randomized clinical trial (RCT) and provided baseline data were included. We determined participants' diabetes-specific family functioning types at baseline using a validated, survey-administered, typology assessment tool. We investigated the associations between type and engagement (eg, attending coaching sessions and responding to text messages) and psychosocial (eg, well-being and diabetes distress) and glycemic outcomes at mid- and post-treatment.
resultsDespite overall high engagement, there was variability across types in engagement and effects. WantMoreInvolvement benefited the most; Satisfied withLowInvolvement showed early improvements that waned; Collaborative &Helpful were highly engaged but derived minimal benefits from the intervention; and CriticallyInvolved benefitted the least and may have experienced some harm.
conclusionsWe demonstrated the utility of a novel diabetes-specific family functioning typology to explain variability in response to a family-focused intervention. Findings from this work answer the calls for systems-level consideration in precision behavioral medicine and drive hypothesis generation for future, tailored interventions. REGISTRATION: The larger RCT is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04347291).
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.