Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2026
Comparative Effectiveness of Diabetes Self-Care Interventions in African-American Adults: A Three-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02957513 (Improving Self-Care Decisions of Medically Underserved African-Americans With Uncontrolled Diabetes), which is not on this 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.
Improving Self-Care Decisions of Medically Underserved African-Americans With Uncontrolled Diabetes: Effectiveness of Patient-Driven Text Messaging Versus Health Coaching
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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough studies have demonstrated that many patient-centered behavioral interventions are effective in improving diabetes self-care, little is known regarding their comparative effectiveness.
objectiveThe Management of Diabetes in Everyday Life (MODEL) Study sought to compare the effectiveness of promising alternative patient-centered behavioral interventions, including educational materials (EM) alone, health coaching (HC)+EM, and text messaging (TM)+EM, for improving diabetes self-care.
designThree-arm pragmatic randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02957513).
participantsA total of 666 African-American adults with uncontrolled diabetes (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] ≥ 8%) and multiple chronic conditions from 19 Mid-South US primary care practices randomly assigned to EM, HC+EM, or TM+EM in a 1:2:2 ratio.
interventionsEM-alone participants received culturally tailored and patient-vetted diabetes EM. HC+EM participants received motivational interviewing-based coaching from certified lay health coaches. TM+EM participants received personalized and tailored messages. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcomes included patient-reported healthy eating, exercise, and medication adherence self-care behaviors. Secondary outcomes included HbA1c, body weight, quality of life, and primary care engagement. KEY
resultsAll three arms significantly improved healthy eating, exercise, and HbA1c from baseline to 12 months. EM participants increased healthy eating days by 0.67 ± 0.19 day/week (95% CI, 0.30-1.04), HC+EM by 0.99 ± 0.15 day/week (95% CI, 0.70-1.28), and TM+EM by 1.36 ± 0.15 day/week (95% CI, 1.07-1.64). Improvements in exercise behaviors were similar in all arms. TM+EM participants experienced significantly greater improvement in healthy eating than EM-alone participants (0.69 ± 0.24 day/week). Average reduction in HbA1c was 0.76% ± 0.12% (p ≤ 0.0001) and 90 of 349 participants (25.8%) with complete data for HbA1c achieved reductions below 8%.
conclusionThe MODEL Study demonstrates that EM-alone, HC+EM, and TM+EM are effective for improving self-care behaviors and HbA1c. TM+EM is more effective than EM-alone in improving healthy eating. Low-cost EM, HC+EM, and TM+EM should be made more readily available in primary care settings nationwide.
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.