Diabetes body project eating disorder prevention program-Descriptive content analysis of participant and facilitator feedback in a multinational randomized controlled trial.
Severina Haugvik, Shiraz Harel, Heather Shaw, Maartje de Wit, Elena Toschi, Mareille H C L Hennekes, Torild Skrivarhaug, Knut Dahl-Jørgensen, Eric Stice, Line Wisting
{"title":"Diabetes body project eating disorder prevention program-Descriptive content analysis of participant and facilitator feedback in a multinational randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Severina Haugvik, Shiraz Harel, Heather Shaw, Maartje de Wit, Elena Toschi, Mareille H C L Hennekes, Torild Skrivarhaug, Knut Dahl-Jørgensen, Eric Stice, Line Wisting","doi":"10.1111/dme.70108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To examine and describe feedback after participation in a novel eating disorder prevention program for young women with type 1 diabetes (Diabetes Body Project) in a multinational randomised controlled trial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Written feedback from participants (N = 109) and facilitators (N = 19) at four sites (Europe and US) was analysed using descriptive, manifest content analysis. Open-ended questions included motivation for participation, most/less valuable aspects of the program and suggestions for improvement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>\"Community\" was the most important motivator and most valued aspect, reported by one-third of participants. When asked about less valued aspects of the program, participants and facilitators most frequently reported \"none/not sure/everything was valuable\" and \"nothing\" respectively. Suggestions to improve the program common for participants and facilitators were \"more creative exercises\", specific for participants after \"none\" was \"limit homework/obligations\" and specific for facilitators was \"more flexibility to move away from the script\". The three most frequently perceived barriers for participation reported by participants and facilitators were \"requiring personal vulnerability\", \"time and energy constraints\" and the \"group setting\".</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Participants and facilitators expressed overall high satisfaction with the program, specifically the value of T1D community. Additionally, they suggested incorporating more creative exercises. Future research should aim at widespread implementation and addressing barriers to participation.</p>","PeriodicalId":520603,"journal":{"name":"Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association","volume":" ","pages":"e70108"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.70108","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: To examine and describe feedback after participation in a novel eating disorder prevention program for young women with type 1 diabetes (Diabetes Body Project) in a multinational randomised controlled trial.
Methods: Written feedback from participants (N = 109) and facilitators (N = 19) at four sites (Europe and US) was analysed using descriptive, manifest content analysis. Open-ended questions included motivation for participation, most/less valuable aspects of the program and suggestions for improvement.
Results: "Community" was the most important motivator and most valued aspect, reported by one-third of participants. When asked about less valued aspects of the program, participants and facilitators most frequently reported "none/not sure/everything was valuable" and "nothing" respectively. Suggestions to improve the program common for participants and facilitators were "more creative exercises", specific for participants after "none" was "limit homework/obligations" and specific for facilitators was "more flexibility to move away from the script". The three most frequently perceived barriers for participation reported by participants and facilitators were "requiring personal vulnerability", "time and energy constraints" and the "group setting".
Conclusions: Participants and facilitators expressed overall high satisfaction with the program, specifically the value of T1D community. Additionally, they suggested incorporating more creative exercises. Future research should aim at widespread implementation and addressing barriers to participation.