Abstract
Objectives
To identify, describe in detail, and assess the evidence regarding the effects of Diabetes Conversation Maps™, an educational tool that engages diabetic patients in group discussions about diabetes-related topics, over a range of patient outcomes.
Methods
We conducted a systematic literature review of articles published since 2005 that evaluated the Maps™ since 2005 using five electronic databases, and the reference lists of relevant papers. Non-English languages, non-journal papers, and studies that only included a description of the Maps™ were excluded. A quality assessment of relevant studies was performed. Outcomes were grouped into: objective (e.g., HbA1c levels), subjective (e.g., self-efficacy), and health behaviors (e.g., medication adherence).
Results
Of the 62 studies originally identified, 13 were included in the final sample. The overall methodological quality of the studies was intermediate (score: 17 of 28). Almost all studies examined objective health measures, with most indicating non-significant differences between the Maps™ intervention and the control group/s. Mixed results were found regarding the influence on HbA1c. The majority of studies reported no significant change in blood pressure and mixed results were found regarding other health indicators. Only five studies examined subjective measures and eight assessed the effects on health behaviors, mostly reporting non-significant or positive findings.
Conclusions
This review provides evidence about the limited number and relatively low quality of studies, which examined the influence of Maps™ on health outcomes. Although Maps™ hold the potential to improve health outcomes, there is a need to develop well-designed large sample studies that enable to draw more conclusive results.
To identify, describe in detail, and assess the evidence regarding the effects of Diabetes Conversation Maps™, an educational tool that engages diabetic patients in group discussions about diabetes-related topics, over a range of patient outcomes.
Methods
We conducted a systematic literature review of articles published since 2005 that evaluated the Maps™ since 2005 using five electronic databases, and the reference lists of relevant papers. Non-English languages, non-journal papers, and studies that only included a description of the Maps™ were excluded. A quality assessment of relevant studies was performed. Outcomes were grouped into: objective (e.g., HbA1c levels), subjective (e.g., self-efficacy), and health behaviors (e.g., medication adherence).
Results
Of the 62 studies originally identified, 13 were included in the final sample. The overall methodological quality of the studies was intermediate (score: 17 of 28). Almost all studies examined objective health measures, with most indicating non-significant differences between the Maps™ intervention and the control group/s. Mixed results were found regarding the influence on HbA1c. The majority of studies reported no significant change in blood pressure and mixed results were found regarding other health indicators. Only five studies examined subjective measures and eight assessed the effects on health behaviors, mostly reporting non-significant or positive findings.
Conclusions
This review provides evidence about the limited number and relatively low quality of studies, which examined the influence of Maps™ on health outcomes. Although Maps™ hold the potential to improve health outcomes, there is a need to develop well-designed large sample studies that enable to draw more conclusive results.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | A617-A618 |
| Number of pages | 2 |
| Journal | Value in Health |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue number | 7 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2015 |
