Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25565290›Full record

Trial reportHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2016

Making sense of change: patients' views of diabetes and GP-led integrated diabetes care.

Letitia H Burridge, Michele M Foster, Maria Donald, Jianzhen Zhang, Anthony W Russell, Claire L Jackson

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Gaining reconciliation when living with insulin treated diabetes: a qualitative study using content analysis.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Improving patient self-care using diabetes technologies.Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2019
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Diabetes care, orofacial pain, screening tests, and pharmaceutical industry interactions.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2015
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Letitia H BurridgeDiscipline of General Practice, School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Michele M FosterSocial Work and Social Policy, School of Social Work and Human Services, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia.
Maria DonaldDiscipline of General Practice, School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Jianzhen ZhangDiscipline of General Practice, School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Anthony W RussellDepartment of Diabetes and Endocrinology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia.
Claire L JacksonDiscipline of General Practice, School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth system reform is directed towards better management of diabetes. However, change can be difficult, and patients' perspectives are a key aspect of implementing change.

objectiveThis study investigated patients' perceptions and experiences of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), self-care and engagement with GP-led integrated diabetes care.

designQualitative interviews were conducted with purposively selected patients with T2DM following their initial medical appointment in the new model of care. Normalization process theory was used to orientate the thematic analysis, to explain the work of implementing change.

settingTwo specialist GP-based complex diabetes services in primary care in Brisbane, Australia.

participantsIntervention group patients (n = 30) in a randomized controlled trial to evaluate a model of GP-led integrated care for complex T2DM.

main outcome measuresParticipants' experiences and perceptions of diabetes management and a GP-led model of care.

resultsThree themes were identified: sensibility of change, 'diabetic life' and diabetes care alliance. The imperative of change made sense, but some participants experienced dissonance between this rational view and their lived reality. Diabetes invaded life, revealing incongruities between participants' values and living with diabetes. They appreciated a flexible and personalized approach to care. DISCUSSION: Participants responded to advice in ways that seemed rational within the complexities of their life context. Their diabetes partnerships with health professionals coupled providers' biomedical expertise with patients' contextual expertise.

conclusionsLearning to manage relationships with various health professionals adds to patients' diabetes-related work. Providers need to adopt a flexible, interactive approach and foster trust, to enable better diabetes care.

Indexed as

Disease ManagementAgedDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleGeneral PracticeHealth BehaviorHumansLife StyleMaleMiddle AgedPerceptionQualitative ResearchSelf CareSocioeconomic Factorsgeneral practitionerGP-led integrated carenormalization process theoryprimary careself-caretype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID25565290
PMCPMC5055219

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.