Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33242455›Full record

SynthesisThe Lancet. Global health2021

Task-sharing interventions for improving control of diabetes in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Joseph Linju Maria, T N Anand, Boban Dona, Jose Prinu, Dorairaj Prabhakaran, Panniyammakal Jeemon

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Lancet. Global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Joseph Linju MariaCentre for Chronic Disease Control, New Delhi, India.
T N AnandCentre for Chronic Disease Control, New Delhi, India.
Boban DonaCentre for Chronic Disease Control, New Delhi, India.
Jose PrinuPublic Health Foundation of India, New Delhi, India.
Dorairaj PrabhakaranCentre for Chronic Disease Control, New Delhi, India; Public Health Foundation of India, New Delhi, India.
Panniyammakal JeemonAchutha Menon Centre for Health Science Studies, Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum, India. Electronic address: pjeemon@gmail.com.
Centre for Chronic Disease Control · INPublic Health Foundation of India · INSree Chitra Thirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology · IN

Funding

DBT-Wellcome Trust India Alliance IA/CPHI/14/1/501497NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL125442Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTask-sharing interventions using non-physician health-care workers might be a potential diabetes management strategy in health systems that are constrained by physician shortages, such as those in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs).

methodsWe did a systematic review and meta-analysis of task-sharing intervention strategies for managing type 2 diabetes in LMICs. We searched PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL from database inception to Sept 25, 2019, for studies that were randomised control trials or cluster randomised trials with task-shifted or task-shared interventions delivered to adults (≥18 years) by non-physician health workers versus usual care, done in LMICs with glycated haemoglobin (HbA

findingsWe found 4213 studies from the literature search, of which 46 (1·1%) were eligible for the narrative synthesis, including a total of 16 973 participants. 16 of these studies were excluded from the meta-analysis due to high risk of bias. 24 studies with a total of 5345 participants were included in the meta-analysis of HbA

interpretationTask sharing interventions with non-physician healthcare workers show moderate effectiveness in diabetes management in LMIC settings. Although relatively high heterogeneity limits the interpretation of the overall findings, interventions led by pharmacists and nurses in LMICs with relatively high physician density are effective strategies in the management of diabetes.

fundingWellcome Trust-Department of Biotechnology India Alliance.

Indexed as

Community Health WorkersDelivery of Health CareDeveloping CountriesNursesNutritionistsPharmacistsAdolescentAdultAgedBlood GlucoseDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Global HealthGlycated HemoglobinHealth PersonnelHumansMiddle AgedBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobin

Identifiers

PMID33242455
PMCPMC8279953
OpenAlexW3107923343

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.