ArticleJMIR medical education2025
Impact of Motivational Interviewing Education on General Practitioners' and Trainees' Learning and Diabetes Outcomes in Primary Care: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2025. 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.
- Evaluation of Combined Educational Methods on Motivational Interviewing for Final-Year Medical Students: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
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
Background: Effective diabetes management requires behavioral change support from primary care providers. However, general practitioners (GPs) often lack training in patient-centered communication methods such as motivational interviewing (MI), especially in time-constrained settings. While brief MI offers a practical alternative, evidence on its impact among GPs and patient outcomes remains limited. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a structured MI educational program for GPs and GP trainees on their MI knowledge and confidence, and its impact on clinical outcomes among patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care settings. Methods: A mixed methods study was conducted using a before-and-after two-group design with quantitative assessments of GPs' knowledge and patients' biomarkers, supplemented by qualitative interviews. The intervention group (n=35) received a 4-hour interactive MI workshop, optional web-based modules, and brief MI guides. The control group received standard care. A total of 149 and 167 patients with diabetes were included in the study and control groups, respectively. Results: A paired-sample t test was conducted to evaluate the impact of the MI course on the learners' knowledge. There was a statistically significant difference in the knowledge test scores from Time 1 (mean 11.46, SD 3.48) to Time 2 (mean 15.04, SD 2.35), t28= -7.74; P<.001 (2-tailed). The mean increase in knowledge score was 3.57 (SD 2.44), with a 95% CI of 2.62 to 4.52, indicating a large and statistically significant effect. The eta-squared statistic indicated a large effect size (eta-squared=0.85). Patients in the intervention group had greater improvements in HbA1c (mean difference= -0.50, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.09; P=.02) and diastolic blood pressure (mean difference= -5.96 mmHg, 95% CI -8.66 to -3.25; P<.001) compared to controls. Qualitative feedback highlighted the usefulness of brief MI, along with challenges in mastering advanced techniques and time constraints. Conclusions: The MI educational program improved GP trainees' MI knowledge and patient outcomes. Brief MI appears feasible in primary care but requires ongoing support for skill development and implementation.
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.