Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Replicating group-based education interventions for the management of type 2 diabetes: a review of intervention reporting.
Odgers-Jewell, K; Ball, L E; Reidlinger, D P; Isenring, E A; Thomas, R; Kelly, J T.
Affiliation
  • Odgers-Jewell K; Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia.
  • Ball LE; Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia.
  • Reidlinger DP; Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia.
  • Isenring EA; Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia.
  • Thomas R; Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia.
  • Kelly JT; School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Diabet Med ; 37(5): 768-778, 2020 05.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31646673
ABSTRACT

AIMS:

To assess the completeness of reporting of group-based education interventions for the management of type 2 diabetes.

METHODS:

A previous systematic review of group-based education programmes for adults with type 2 diabetes identified eligible intervention studies. Data were extracted and assessed using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication ('TIDieR') checklist. Missing data were sourced from other published material, or by contacting authors.

RESULTS:

Fifty-three publications describing 47 studies were included. No publications sufficiently described all items. Authors of 43 of the 47 included studies (91%) were contacted via e-mail to obtain missing data in order to complete the TIDieR checklist. Seven (16%) did not respond. Additional data were obtained for 33/47 studies (70%). Most studies (45/47, 96%) described the intervention duration and frequency, detailed the procedures and rationale (40/47, 85%), provided a brief intervention name and explained any individual tailoring (38/47, 81%), defined whether providers received training and adequately described how the programme was delivered (37/47, 79%). However, few described any modifications (28/47, 60%), whether the intervention was delivered as planned (27/47, 57%), where it was delivered (21/47, 45%), whether materials were provided (19/47, 40%), and who delivered the intervention (13/47, 28%).

CONCLUSIONS:

Group-based education interventions for the management of type 2 diabetes are poorly reported. To translate effective research into practice, practitioners need sufficient detail to implement evidence-based interventions. Researcher adoption of the TIDieR checklist will assist the translation and replication of published interventions.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Health context: 2_ODS3 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Patient Education as Topic / Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 / Documentation / Research Report Type of study: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Diabet Med Year: 2020 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Health context: 2_ODS3 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Patient Education as Topic / Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 / Documentation / Research Report Type of study: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Diabet Med Year: 2020 Document type: Article