ArticleJMIR diabetes2026
Content Validation of an Electronic Health Record-Based Diabetes Self-Management Support Tool for Older Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: Qualitative Study.
Article in JMIR diabetes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Older adults with diabetes frequently access their electronic health record (EHR) notes but often report difficulty understanding medical jargon and nonspecific self-care instructions. To address this communication gap, we developed Support-Engage-Empower-Diabetes (SEE-Diabetes), a patient-centered, EHR-integrated diabetes self-management support tool designed to embed tailored educational statements within the assessment and plan section of clinical notes. Objective: This study aimed to validate the clarity, relevance, and alignment of SEE-Diabetes content with the Association of Diabetes Care & Education Specialists 7 Self-Care Behaviors framework from the perspectives of older adults and clinicians. Methods: An interdisciplinary team conducted expert reviews and qualitative interviews with 11 older adults with diabetes and 8 clinicians practicing in primary care (family medicine) and specialty diabetes care settings at a Midwestern academic health center. Patients evaluated the readability and relevance of the content, while clinicians assessed clarity, sufficiency, and potential clinical utility. Interview data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis, and descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant characteristics. Results: Patients (mean age 72, SD 4.9 y; mean diabetes duration 26, SD 15 y) reported that the SEE-Diabetes statements were clear, relevant, and written in plain language that supported understanding of self-care recommendations. Clinicians (mean 13, SD 9.5 y of diabetes care experience) viewed the content as concise, clinically appropriate, and well aligned with patient self-management goals and the Association of Diabetes Care & Education Specialists 7 Self-Care Behaviors framework. Both groups identified the tool's potential to enhance patient engagement and patient-clinician communication, while noting opportunities to improve the specificity of language, particularly within medication-related content. Conclusions: SEE-Diabetes demonstrated content validity as a practical, patient-centered digital health tool for supporting diabetes self-management communication within EHR clinical notes. The findings support its use as a complementary approach to reinforce self-care communication in routine clinical practice and highlight areas for refinement to enhance personalization.
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.