ArticleBMJ public health2024
Digital interventions for adolescents with type 1 diabetes to promote health literacy? A qualitative study on physicians' perspective in Germany.
Article in BMJ public health, 2024. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) require a high level of health literacy (HL) to prevent complications. It remains unclear what potential digital interventions have for promoting HL among adolescents with T1D, as viewed by physicians working with this target group. Additionally, it is unclear how the institutions (inpatient care and outpatient care) can support and facilitate the use of digital interventions to promote HL. Research design and methods: An exploratory study was conducted using semistructured interviews with physicians (n=12) in Germany. The interview questions are based on a previous systematic review. The coding was conducted deductively and inductively using MAXQDA software. Subsequently, the interviews were analysed systematically through an iterative process of content analyses in line with Kuckartz Results: It was reported by the physicians that digital interventions are underused due to technical resources, lack of structural conditions, information and legal constraints. The utilisation of digital interventions to promote HL was heterogeneous and depended primarily on the willingness of the physicians. Communication strategy techniques were widely employed to motivate patients, an activity occurring mainly in-person, thus limiting the opportunity for the deployment of digital interventions. Conclusions: To increase the use of digital interventions and improve HL, support for digital literacy skills could be implemented. Capacity building through patient-centred, interdisciplinary and participatory culture should be considered. The findings of this study can provide valuable insights for practice, research and policy.
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.