ArticleBMJ open2025
Codevelopment of a complex intervention to reduce inequalities in paediatric diabetes secondary care outcomes for children with type 1 diabetes from underserved groups.
Article 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo codevelop (with children and young people with diabetes (CYPD)) an intervention to improve diabetes control and future health outcomes of CYPD from 'underserved' groups, to reduce treatment outcome inequalities between different socioeconomic and ethnic groups. To follow Medical Research Council guidance for complex interventions and the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour) model for behaviour change intervention development.
designIn phase 1 (previously reported), we established the evidence base, conducted literature reviews and analysed data from semistructured interviews with CYPD and their carers. In phase 2 (this report), we applied the COM-B framework to identify intervention components; in phase 3 (this report), we evaluated these components, including focus groups with CYPD, their carers' and healthcare practitioner (HCP) surveys, using the Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Spill-Over Effects, Equity criteria.
settingSecondary care; children, young people and their carers' were approached from two large paediatric diabetes services in England, both with socioeconomically and ethnically diverse underserved populations; paediatric diabetes HCPs were surveyed across four English regions.
participantsN=69 underserved CYPD (aged 5-19 years) and/or family members took part in interviews; N=48 paediatric diabetes HCP survey respondents (survey 1); N=34 paediatric diabetes HCP survey respondents (survey 2); N=3 young people's advisory group participants; N=17 underserved CYPD/carers focus group participants; N=9 wider stakeholder participants.
resultsThe codevelopment process and integration of COM-B established four elements for an intervention package: (1) an enhanced peer support/mentoring programme; (2) provision of a health and well-being coach to CYPD/families; (3) family/community support to address social and community issues and (4) training for HCPs, including cultural competence, poverty proofing and to emphasise the need for increased sensitivity and better supported communication in work with CYPD from underserved groups.
conclusionsThe Diversity in Diabetes codevelopment work informed an intervention to improve diabetes care in underserved groups, reflecting sociocultural contexts and plausible support options at the individual, community and clinical levels. The 'Diversity in Diabetes' programme will next test feasibility and further refine the intervention package in two more paediatric diabetes centres in England.
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.