Trial reportThe Journal of international medical research2018
Effectiveness of the I
Trial report in The Journal of international medical research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of weight loss in control group participants of lifestyle randomized trials.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- Effectiveness of an educational intervention on the components of the metabolic syndrome of adults with type 2 diabetes: non-randomized clinical trial.Investigacion y educacion en enfermeria · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of an interdisciplinary programme led by nurses in relation to metabolic syndrome (MS) and cardiovascular risk (CVR). Methods This randomized, controlled, clinical trial included 74 patients diagnosed with MS (experimental group [EG], n = 37; control group [CG], n = 37). The intervention consisted of a 12-month interdisciplinary programme (pre-test, 6 months of intervention, 12 months of intervention, and 1-year follow-up post-intervention) coordinated by nursing. Results We found a progressive and significant reduction for all clinical, biochemical, and anthropometric parameters analysed at different time points. In the EG, remission of MS by 48.1% in the short term was observed (83.8% in the medium term) and maintained at 1 year post-intervention. In the CG, the prevalence of MS increased by 2.7% from the initial evaluation to study completion. A similar trend was observed for CVR. In the EG, 100% of subjects had a moderate-low risk of CVR at 1 year post-intervention, whereas the CG had CVR in all categories. Conclusion An interdisciplinary, nurse-led programme improves participants' metabolic and cardiovascular health, while maintaining long-term effects. Our findings suggest an important role of the professional nurse as a nexus between the patient, different professionals, and the community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.