Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35612885›Full record

ArticleJMIR diabetes2022

Implementing the Digital Diabetes Questionnaire as a Clinical Tool in Routine Diabetes Care: Focus Group Discussions With Patients and Health Care Professionals.

Maria Svedbo Engström, Unn-Britt Johansson, Janeth Leksell, Ebba Linder, Katarina Eeg-Olofsson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR diabetes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. User-Centered Design of an Electronic COPD Patient Questionnaire for Clinical Decision Support.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

5 authors.

Maria Svedbo EngströmSchool of Health and Welfare, Dalarna University, Falun, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8267-592X
Unn-Britt JohanssonSophiahemmet University, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3309-136X
Janeth LeksellDepartment of Medical Sciences, Clinical Diabetology and Metabolism, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8682-2045
Ebba LinderSwedish National Diabetes Register, Center of Registers Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0323-9610
Katarina Eeg-OlofssonSwedish National Diabetes Register, Center of Registers Västra Götaland, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3376-4707

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Diabetes Questionnaire is a digital patient-reported outcome and experience measure for adults living with diabetes. The Diabetes Questionnaire is intended for use in routine clinical visits in diabetes care and to enable patient perspectives to be integrated into the Swedish National Diabetes Register. The Diabetes Questionnaire was developed on the basis of patients' perspectives, and evidence for its measurement qualities has been demonstrated. Patients receive an invitation to complete the questionnaire before clinical visits, and the patient and health care professional (HCP) can discuss the findings, which are instantly displayed during the visit. Implementation processes for new tools in routine care need to be studied to understand the influence of contextual factors, the support needed, and how patients and HCPs experience clinical use.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to describe patients' and HCPs' experiences of initiating the use of the digital Diabetes Questionnaire as a clinical tool in routine diabetes care, supported by a structured implementation strategy involving initial education, local facilitators, and regular follow-ups.

methodsIn this qualitative study, semistructured focus group discussions were conducted 12 months after the use of the Diabetes Questionnaire was initiated. Participants were diabetes specialist nurses and physicians (20 participants in 4 groups) at hospital-based outpatient clinics or primary health care clinics and adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes (15 participants in 4 groups). The audiotaped transcripts were analyzed using inductive qualitative content analysis.

resultsThe results revealed 2 main categories that integrated patients' and HCPs' experiences, which together formed an overarching theme: While implementation demands new approaches, the Diabetes Questionnaire provides a broader perspective. The first main category (The Diabetes Questionnaire supports person-centered clinical visits) comprised comments expressing that the digital Diabetes Questionnaire can initiate and encourage reflection in preparation for clinical visits, bring important topics to light during clinical visits, and broaden the scope of discussion by providing additional information. The second main category (The process of initiating the implementation of the Diabetes Questionnaire) comprised comments that described differences in engagement among HCPs and their managers, challenges of establishing new routines, experiences of support during implementation, thoughts about the Diabetes Questionnaire, need to change local administrative routines, and opportunities and concerns for continued use.

conclusionsThe Diabetes Questionnaire can broaden the scope of health data in routine diabetes care. While implementation demands new approaches, patients and HCPs saw potential positive impacts of using the questionnaire at both the individual and group levels. Our results can inform further development of implementation strategies to support the clinical use of the questionnaire.

Indexed as

diabetes mellitus, type 1diabetes mellitus, type 2focus groupshealth care professionalsoutpatientspatient carepatient participationpatient-reported outcome measuresqualitative researchregistries

Identifiers

PMID35612885
PMCPMC9178456

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.