Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37697302›Full record

ReviewInternational journal for equity in health2023

Current evidence for designing self-management support for underserved populations: an integrative review using the example of diabetes.

Ian Litchfield, Tim Barrett, Julian Hamilton-Shield, Theresa Moore, Parth Narendran, Sabi Redwood, Aidan Searle, Suma Uday, Jess Wheeler, Sheila Greenfield

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal for equity in health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Support needs for chronic disease self-management among persons attending a Primary Health Care facility in Victor Khanye, Mpumalanga.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

10 authors.

Ian LitchfieldInstitute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. i.litchfield@bham.ac.uk.
Tim BarrettInstitute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Julian Hamilton-ShieldTranslational Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS1 2NT, UK.
Theresa MooreThe National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West) at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
Parth NarendranInstitute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Sabi RedwoodPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS1 1TH, B52 8EA, UK.
Aidan SearleNIHR Bristol BRC Nutrition Theme, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston Foundation Trust, Bristol, B52 8AE, UK.
Suma UdayDiabetes and Endocrinology, Birmingham Women's and Children's Hospital, Birmingham, B4 6NH, UK.
Jess WheelerPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS1 1TH, B52 8EA, UK.
Sheila GreenfieldInstitute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.

Funding

Department of Health NIHR202358
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsWith numerous and continuing attempts at adapting diabetes self-management support programmes to better account for underserved populations, its important that the lessons being learned are understood and shared. The work we present here reviews the latest evidence and best practice in designing and embedding culturally and socially sensitive, self-management support programmes.

methodsWe explored the literature with regard to four key design considerations of diabetes self-management support programmes: Composition - the design and content of written materials and digital tools and interfaces; Structure - the combination of individual and group sessions, their frequency, and the overall duration of programmes; Facilitators - the combination of individuals used to deliver the programme; and Context - the influence and mitigation of a range of individual, socio-cultural, and environmental factors.

resultsWe found useful and recent examples of design innovation within a variety of countries and models of health care delivery including Brazil, Mexico, Netherlands, Spain, United Kingdom, and United States of America. Within Composition we confirmed the importance of retaining best practice in creating readily understood written information and intuitive digital interfaces; Structure the need to offer group, individual, and remote learning options in programmes of flexible duration and frequency; Facilitators where the benefits of using culturally concordant peers and community-based providers were described; and finally in Context the need to integrate self-management support programmes within existing health systems, and tailor their various constituent elements according to the language, resources, and beliefs of individuals and their communities.

conclusionsA number of design principles across the four design considerations were identified that together offer a promising means of creating the next generation of self-management support programme more readily accessible for underserved communities. Ultimately, we recommend that the precise configuration should be co-produced by all relevant service and patient stakeholders and its delivery embedded in local health systems.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusSelf-ManagementBrazilHealth BehaviorHumansLanguageDiabetesSelf-management supportUnderserved populations

Identifiers

PMID37697302
PMCPMC10496394

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.