SynthesisBMJ open2025
Enablers and barriers of e-learning utilising smart technologies in type 2 diabetes care for clinicians: a systematic review.
Synthesis 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesContinuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) supports Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) management, but healthcare professionals (HCPs) often face challenges interpreting data. E-learning platforms can enhance knowledge, skills and confidence. This systematic review identified enablers and barriers to e-learning for CGM interpretation.
designSystematic review conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL were searched on 7 February 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies of HCPs using e-learning for T2D management were included, both comparative and non-comparative. Outcomes included enablers and barriers. Eligible designs were randomised, quasi-experimental, controlled before-and-after and observational studies. No restrictions on setting or language; conference abstracts included if full text was available DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data using a predefined form; disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. Thematic analysis identified key enablers and barriers. Methodological quality was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist, and findings were synthesised narratively.
resultsFour studies met inclusion criteria, including 6790 participants (physicians, nurses, midwives and medical residents). E-learning improved knowledge and skills. Emami
conclusionBased on current evidence, it is unclear if e-learning can significantly enhance HCPs' knowledge, skills and confidence in T2D management. Barriers such as time constraints and resistance to change remain, and the limited number and quality of studies restrict the generalisability of these findings. E-learning may offer potential benefits, but further robust randomised controlled trials are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes and strategies to overcome these challenges. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023455156.
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.