Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41642908›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2026

Exploring stakeholder perceptions of peer support initiatives in the management of diabetes in low- and middle-income countries: An online survey study.

Bishal Gyawali, Soahum Bagchi, Zainab Dakhil, Israa Yaseen, Fathima Aaysha Cader, Lilian Pinto da Silva, Pooja Dewan, Diana Sherifali, Sheila Klassen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Informal carers' perception on perspective taking when reporting as proxies about someone else's health.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    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

9 authors.

Bishal GyawaliSection for Health Services Research, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8315-1925
Soahum BagchiHarvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8153-8915
Zainab DakhilIbn Al-Bitar Cardiac Centre, Al-Kindy College of Medicine/University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7102-522X
Israa YaseenBaghdad Heart Center, Baghdad Teaching Hospital, Medical City, Baghdad, Iraq.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3575-7359
Fathima Aaysha CaderKettering General Hospital, Kettering, United Kingdom.
Lilian Pinto da SilvaFaculty of Physical Therapy, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Minas Gerais, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9352-1504
Pooja DewanBritish Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Research Centre, University of Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Diana SherifaliSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Sheila KlassenDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7065-6668

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Peer support is an effective strategy to promote self-management behaviors and improve well-being in those with cardiometabolic disease, including type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). There is limited knowledge about stakeholder perceptions regarding peer support programs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The study assessed stakeholders' awareness and understanding of peer support initiatives for T2DM, and explored their perceived barriers and readiness for implementation. A cross-sectional, self-administered online survey with branching logic was distributed to stakeholders across macro- (health policy), meso (tertiary hospital), and micro (community) levels of LMIC healthcare systems from June 1 to December 15, 2023. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively; qualitative data underwent thematic content analysis. A total of 69 respondents from 25 LMICs participated in the survey. Due to branching logic and response attrition, 53 surveys (77%) had complete responses. Most respondents were medical doctors (n = 35, 50.7%) and a large proportion worked in tertiary hospitals (n = 27, 39.1%). Thirty-nine respondents (56.5%) were aware of peer support; among the 38 respondents with complete data, 29 (76%) reported active involvement in T2DM peer support initiatives. Of 15 responses to open-ended questionnaires regarding barriers to T2DM peer support, 9 (60%) cited concerns about limited resources and lack of funding. Local leadership (mean ± standard deviation: 3.4 ± 1.2), resource allocation (2.7 ± 1.4), and sustainability planning (2.7 ± 1.4) showed the highest perceived readiness on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Stakeholders in LMICs demonstrate awareness and active involvement in T2DM peer support programs. While limited resources and funding remain significant barriers, local leadership, resource allocation, and sustainability planning showed the highest perceived readiness, indicating promising foundations for implementation. Strengthening these areas through targeted support could facilitate the expansion and sustainability of peer support initiatives in resource-constrained settings.

Identifiers

PMID41642908
PMCPMC12875572

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.