ArticleInternational journal of behavioral medicine2026
Motivating Women with Gestational Diabetes: Are Healthcare Professionals Saying the Right Words?
Article in International journal of behavioral medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective communication plays a crucial role in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) management, yet little research has examined whether healthcare professionals (HCPs) use motivational statements that align with patient preferences. This study investigates the alignment between the motivational statements used by HCPs and those preferred by women with GDM, applying self-determination theory (SDT) as a framework and using qualitative as well as quantitative techniques for analysing results.
methodOne hundred twenty-six pregnant women with GDM and 21 HCPs rated 27 motivational statements categorized into autonomy, competence, and relatedness components of SDT. Differences in statement ratings between groups were analysed using Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction. A chi-square test was used to assess discrepancies between statements used by HCPs and statements written by patients. Spearman's correlations, Kruskal-Wallis tests, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for associations between statement ratings and demographic characteristics (BMI, age, education level, history of GDM, obstetric history).
resultsThe chi-square test revealed a significant misalignment. Women with GDM preferred competence-focused statements, whereas HCPs emphasized autonomy (χ
conclusionThe study highlights the need for better alignment between HCPs' communication and patients' needs to enhance their sense of competence, which could improve adherence to treatment recommendations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42056370What 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.