ArticleBMC primary care2025
Evaluation of diabetes knowledge among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Portugal primary care - where is the gap.
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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Supporting people with type 2 diabetes mellitus through the REDE D+ social prescribing program: feasibility of a non-randomized pilot study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Acceptability of a social prescribing program (REDE D+) for self-care and health literacy among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus-a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and its complexity is fundamental to achieving glycaemic control and preventing complications. This study aimed to assess people's diabetes knowledge in Primary Health Care Portugal context and explore sociodemographic and clinical data that may influence this knowledge.
methodsA cross-sectional study of a descriptive nature was conducted between September 2022 and March 2023 through a convenience sample of 365 persons diagnosed with T2DM in primary care. The data were collected using the Diabetes Knowledge Test (DKT) and analyzed using descriptive, inferential, and bivariate statistics.
resultsBoth people with T2DM not receiving insulin treatment (7.29; SD ± 1.99) and those receiving insulin treatment (11.98; SD ± 2.64) had an average level of knowledge and demonstrated more difficulties in areas such as diet, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) values, symptom management, and medication use (insulin). Some demographic factors that appear to be associated with better knowledge were younger age groups, higher education levels, and clinical data with lower HbA1c levels.
conclusionsThis study revealed that the knowledge of T2DM patients was average. Understanding the factors that can affect knowledge and the areas of knowledge that need to be explored further, such as diet, clinical value interpretation, symptom management, and medication, can help professionals develop specific interventions that contribute more effectively to better self-care behaviors, metabolic control, and fewer related complications. Additionally, living longer with a diagnosis is not an indicator of better knowledge of the disease, and special attention should be given to older people and those with lower education levels.
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.