ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Enhancing Type 2 Diabetes Management Involving Healthcare Professionals in Primary Care.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrent evidence on diabetes care interventions is either fragmented or focused on specific interventions targeting healthcare professionals or patients. This study aims to categorize diabetes care interventions involving physicians or nurses and their impact on health outcomes for individuals with diabetes. Additionally, it aimed to determine the proportion of favorable findings across healthcare intervention categories.
methodsThis scoping review was conducted in primary care settings and guided by a health system framework. We searched articles from inception to June 2022 in databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. The classification of healthcare interventions was guided by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care taxonomy and health system framework.
resultsResults were reported following the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. From the initial pool of 13,406 articles, 116 met the eligibility criteria and reported interventions conducted across 119 countries or regions, of which 94 were high-level economies. Five healthcare intervention categories were identified: transforming the workforce; service content; re-designing the service delivery system; information and communication technology; and multifaceted. Patient health outcomes were classified into 3 overarching categories with 11 subcategories: clinical outcomes, behavioral outcomes, and psychosocial outcomes. The proportion of statistically significant favorable findings differed across intervention categories and outcome domains. Multifaceted interventions showed relatively higher proportions of favorable findings for clinical outcomes, whereas re-designing the service delivery system interventions showed relatively higher proportions for behavioral outcomes. ICT interventions frequently reported favorable findings related to blood glucose indicators.
conclusionsThis study provides a comprehensive overview of healthcare interventions and health outcomes for diabetes in primary care settings. It emphasizes the importance of tailored interventions, delivery methods, and technology integration for effective diabetes management, advocating for a comprehensive approach from individual to societal 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.