Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Am J Health Promot ; : 8901171241238554, 2024 Apr 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38648265

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of process evaluations (PEs) of diabetes self-management programs (DSMPs). DATA SOURCE: An electronic search using Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (Ensco), Academic Search (Ebsco), and APA PsycInfo (Ebsco). STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Peer-reviewed, empirical quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method studies were included if they (1) were a traditional, group-based DSMP, (2) involved adults at least 18 years with T1DM or T2DM, (3) were a stand-alone or embedded PE, and (4) published in English. DATA EXTRACTION: The following process evaluation outcomes were extracted: fidelity, dose delivered, dose received, reach, recruitment, retention, and context. Additional items were extracted, (eg, process evaluation type, data collection methods; theories; frameworks or conceptual models used to guide the process evaluation, and etc). DATA SYNTHESIS: Due to heterogeneity across studies, studies were synthesized qualitatively (narratively). RESULTS: Sixty-eight studies (k) in 78 articles (n) (k = 68; n = 78) were included. Most were mixed methods of low quality. Studies were typically integrated into outcome evaluations vs being stand-alone, lacked theoretical approaches to guide them, and incorporated limited outcomes such as dose received, reach, and retention. CONCLUSION: Future research should 1) implement stand-alone theoretically grounded PE studies and 2) provide a shared understanding of standardized guidelines to conduct PEs. This will allow public health practitioners and researchers to assess and compare the quality of different programs to be implemented.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...