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":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>To examine and describe feedback after participation in a novel eating disorder prevention program for young women with type 1 diabetes (<i>Diabetes Body Project)</i> in a multinational randomised controlled trial.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Written feedback from participants (<i>N</i> = 109) and facilitators (<i>N</i> = 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>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>“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>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>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>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11251,"journal":{"name":"Diabetic Medicine","volume":"42 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dme.70108","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dme.70108","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","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.
期刊介绍:
Diabetic Medicine, the official journal of Diabetes UK, is published monthly simultaneously, in print and online editions.
The journal publishes a range of key information on all clinical aspects of diabetes mellitus, ranging from human genetic studies through clinical physiology and trials to diabetes epidemiology. We do not publish original animal or cell culture studies unless they are part of a study of clinical diabetes involving humans. Categories of publication include research articles, reviews, editorials, commentaries, and correspondence. All material is peer-reviewed.
We aim to disseminate knowledge about diabetes research with the goal of improving the management of people with diabetes. The journal therefore seeks to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas between clinicians and researchers worldwide. Topics covered are of importance to all healthcare professionals working with people with diabetes, whether in primary care or specialist services.
Surplus generated from the sale of Diabetic Medicine is used by Diabetes UK to know diabetes better and fight diabetes more effectively on behalf of all people affected by and at risk of diabetes as well as their families and carers.”