ArticleImplementation science communications2025
Using longitudinal, multi-partner qualitative data to evaluate the implementation of a diabetes prevention and management intervention among South Asians Americans.
Article in Implementation science communications, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCommunity-clinical linkage models (CCLM) display significant potential to address the unique, multi-level type 2 diabetes risk factors facing minoritized communities, such as South Asian Americans. However, there lacks a systematic, longitudinal evaluation of how such tailored CCLMs can be better implemented in dynamic, real-world settings. This study aims to leverage multi-partner insights, collected in real time, to explore the barriers and facilitators to implement a South Asian American diabetes management and prevention intervention (the DREAM intervention).
methodsThe DREAM intervention, a two-arm randomized controlled trial, was implemented from 2019-2022; partners involved in its implementation were interviewed annually to understand their experiences of the program. Implementation partners included community health workers (CHWs), participating healthcare providers, community advisory board (CAB) partners, and research staff. The interview guide and subsequent deductive qualitative analysis was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).
resultsOverall, 78 interviews were conducted across four waves (2019-2022) with 5 research staff, 8 CHWs, 18 providers/clinic staff, and 12 CAB partners. CHWs adapted intervention characteristics by tailoring curriculum and implementation to patient needs, including personalized goal setting and shifting to remote delivery with COVID-19-related content. At the individual level, participants' occupations, family dynamics, and technological capacity shaped engagement, while changing social, financial, and health contexts over time required CHWs to continually adjust support. Within the inner setting, partner roles and resource availability fluctuated, yet structured and consistent meetings facilitated communication and problem-solving. Outer setting influences, including shifting government and universities policies and the COVID-19 pandemic, required repeated adaptations, while CAB partnerships expanded community connections and services over time. Process-related findings underscored the evolving role of CHWs and research staff in planning and fidelity, with training shifting toward peer mentorship to build capacity.
conclusionFindings revealed the pivotal role of programmatic adaptability and robust partner engagement in navigating dynamic contexts to support the diabetes needs of minoritized communities. The real-time, longitudinal approach taken for data collection and analysis was crucial in understanding how intervention changes were implemented and experienced, providing a model for similar implementation assessments.
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.