Trial reportJournal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
Sustaining Diabetes Shared Medical Appointments After a Pragmatic Trial.
Trial report in Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM. 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.
- Women's Health, Social Issues, and Quality of Care in Family Medicine.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFMArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study is to gain understanding on factors identified by primary care practice members as impacting sustainability of diabetes Shared Medical Appointments (SMAs) after participating in a pragmatic trial that included sustainability planning. SMAs provide diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES) in primary care, though sustainability can be challenging.
methodsThe Invested in Diabetes study was a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial of 2 approaches to providing SMAs for adults with type 2 diabetes. Qualitative interviews at the study end explored primary care practices' experiences with SMAs and perspectives on sustainability, analyzed using a grounded theory hermeneutic editing approach.
resultsSeventy-nine interviews were conducted in 20 participating practices. One primary finding and 3 themes on factors necessary for sustainment emerged: finding: SMAs were seen as valuable, but sustainment plans were inconsistent; theme 1) Sustainability hinges on practical factors, some not supported in current health care payment models; theme 2) Relevance and efficiency are important: future diabetes SMAs anticipated adaptations or revisions; and theme 3) Improvement in reportable practice quality measures would be an incentive to continue SMAs. DISCUSSION: Diabetes SMAs were perceived as beneficial, but difficult to sustain. We found that primary care teams want to provide SMAs and that changes in how primary care practices are reimbursed could support implementation and sustainment of DSMES approaches such as SMAs, leading to improved patient outcomes.
conclusionThere is urgent need for explicit attention to policy change, health care payment innovation, and novel reimbursement models to enhance sustainability of diabetes SMAs.
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.