ArticleJournal of diabetes research2026
A Qualitative Exploration of the Acceptability of a Supported Self-Management Intervention for People With Type 2 Diabetes and Severe Mental Illness.
Article in Journal of diabetes research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Qualitative Exploration of the Acceptability of a Supported Self-Management Intervention for People With Type 2 Diabetes and Severe Mental Illness.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeople with severe mental illness (SMI) are twice as likely to develop Type 2 diabetes (T2D) compared with people without SMI and have poorer outcomes from T2D. Research evaluating self-management interventions for T2D consistently excludes individuals with SMI, therefore existing offers fail to address the specific needs of this population. The DIAMONDS programme (Diabetes and Mental Illness, Improving Outcomes and Self-management) developed a bespoke supported self-management programme for people with coexisting SMI and T2D.
methodsAs part of a mixed-methods feasibility study we collected and analysed qualitative data to explore the acceptability of the DIAMONDS intervention. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 service user participants with SMI and T2D, and 10 DIAMONDS Coaches who delivered the intervention. Interviews were informed by the theoretical framework of acceptability and were thematically analysed.
resultsFour overarching themes were identified, these included: Recognising and addressing a need-highlighting the importance of the intervention in the context of current gaps in care; 'It's all about person-centred, essentially, isn't it?'-emphasising the role of flexible, individualised delivery in acceptability; Utility of different intervention components-describing how different components were used; Tangible change and beneficial effects- improvements in behaviour and health, including smoking cessation. DISCUSSION: The DIAMONDS intervention was acceptable for people with SMI and T2D and for DIAMONDS Coaches who were delivering it. A person-centred approach enabled engagement and self-reported behaviour change, but participants needed differing levels of support for behaviour change. These findings informed refinements to the intervention, which will be evaluated in a definitive trial.
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.