SynthesisBMJ open2025
Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus among people with Middle Eastern backgrounds living in high-income countries: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectivesThis systematic review aims to assess the available evidence on the prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) among Middle Eastern (ME) populations residing in high-income countries (HICs). The review focuses on two key aspects: (1) evaluating the efficacy of interventions for improving health outcomes and (2) examining the barriers to and facilitators of the implementation and effectiveness of interventions.
designSystematic review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, ProQuest Central and Scopus were searched between 10 September 2023 and 10 October 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies published in English from 2000 to 2023 involving ME populations residing in HICs who are prediabetic or at high risk of T2DM. Interventions included behavioural, pharmacological and educational strategies, with outcomes assessed in terms of diabetes incidence, lifestyle changes and healthcare utilisation, as well as barriers and facilitators of intervention effectiveness. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted and synthesised based on study design, geographical location, participant characteristics, type of approach and key outcomes. A narrative synthesis was used to identify patterns in intervention effectiveness, barriers (eg, cultural and gender norms, language) and facilitators (eg, family support, religious considerations).
results20 studies were included and categorised into two groups: interventional studies (randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs) and qualitative and cross-sectional studies. Interventional studies demonstrated significant improvements in health outcomes, including weight loss, increases in physical activity and improved cardiometabolic markers. Qualitative studies revealed important insights into the sociocultural factors facilitating T2DM prevention that must be considered for effective interventions, including gender norms, family dynamics (relations, interactions, etc) and religious beliefs, with barriers including language, lack of health insurance, unaffordable financial costs and social isolation.
conclusionsThis systematic review highlights the effectiveness of culturally sensitive interventions in preventing T2DM among ME populations in HICs. It emphasises a need for co-designed, culturally appropriate interventions that involve people from ME populations in HIC with lived experience of T2DM, healthcare providers and community stakeholders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO, CRD42023457123.
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.