ArticleBMC primary care2025
Enhancement of shared decision-making competencies in diabetes care using the BOPPPS model: a training program design for general practitioners.
Article in BMC primary care, 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.
- A study of the effectiveness of the BOPPPS model combined with FC-CBL in the standardized training of general medicine residents.Frontiers in public health · 2026Trial
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
backgroundDiabetes mellitus is one of the most prevalent chronic diseases worldwide. China has the highest number of diabetic cases worldwide. However, diabetes mellitus is associated with poor awareness, treatment, and control rates. Thus, strategies such as shared decision-making (SDM) are needed to improve diabetes management. In China, SDM training tailored for general practitioners (GPs) is limited, hindering its clinical application. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a diabetes-specific SDM training program for Chinese GPs to increase their communication and decision-making skills in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) care.
methodsTen GPs from Xicheng District, Beijing, participated in the program. The curriculum, which focused on reflective learning theory, was structured using the BOPPPS model (Bridge-in, Objective, Pre-assessment, Participatory Learning, Post-assessment, Summary) in a 4-session (160-min) training program and incorporated group discussions, role-playing, case analyses, and decision aids. Training effectiveness was assessed using quantitative methods (writing tests, role-playing evaluations, and surveys) and qualitative focus group interviews. Statistical and thematic analyses were performed using SPSS and NVivo, respectively.
resultsThe test scores after training were significantly higher than those before training (p = 0.028). Role-playing assessments demonstrated that most participants mastered SDM core elements. Moreover, survey assessments indicated high levels of satisfaction and perceived practicality of the training. Qualitative feedback revealed enhanced attitudes, knowledge, and skills with positive impacts on clinical practice. The participants recommended increasing case complexity, optimizing scheduling, and establishing feedback mechanisms for further refinement.
conclusionThis SDM training program effectively improved the competencies of GPs in diabetes care, offering a novel educational framework for T2DM management. Although this study has several limitations (small sample size and single-city focus), it provides a foundation for scaling up training, evaluating long-term outcomes, and refining curricula to enhance diabetes care quality and patient health outcomes as a pilot study.
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.