Effectiveness of Interventional Studies on Type 2 Diabetes: A Decade Systematic Review

IF 0.6 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Ameneh Pooresmaeil Dorosteh, M. Ghaffari, S. Rakhshanderou
{"title":"Effectiveness of Interventional Studies on Type 2 Diabetes: A Decade Systematic Review","authors":"Ameneh Pooresmaeil Dorosteh, M. Ghaffari, S. Rakhshanderou","doi":"10.5812/jhealthscope-120280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Educational interventions on type 2 diabetes can have life-saving effects. A closer analysis of studies in this area contributes to well-designed interventions. Objectives: We surveyed the effectiveness of interventional studies on type 2 diabetes in the last decade. Data Sources: The research papers were obtained from PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, SID, and Magiran for Persian and English language studies between 2010 and 2019. The PRISMA checklist was used to select the studies for systematic reviews. Study Selection: The criteria for article selection were experimental studies, quasi-experimental studies, clinical trials, and pre-treatment and post-treatment observations. Also, the exclusion criteria were case studies, short articles, cross-sectional studies, descriptive and analytic studies, letters to the editor, and systematic review papers. Finally, 24 studies (out of 1,374) were entered in our study. Data Extraction: An interventional study checklist was used to report the standard of studies: (1) consolidated standards of reporting trials with 25 items; (2) checklist for experimental design with nine items; (3) checklist for quasi-experimental studies with nine items; and (4) transparent reporting of evaluations with non-randomized designs with 22 items. Results: Twenty-four research papers entered the final analysis. Most studies were clinical trials with the intervention period ranging from one to 12 months. Patients were usually selected as the participants. The education interventions in most studies were lectures, questions/answers, group discussions, brainstorming, photo/film/slide display, group teaching, individual training, individual counseling, and group counseling. The main focus of the interventions was on physical activity and diet, with positive effects. Conclusions: Most interventions made on type 2 diabetes variables had positive effects. Therefore, it is recommended that in addition to diet and physical activity, other factors of type 2 diabetes be considered in educational interventions. Also, the most effective and appropriate teaching methods should be considered to prevent and control this disease.","PeriodicalId":12857,"journal":{"name":"Health Scope","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Scope","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5812/jhealthscope-120280","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: Educational interventions on type 2 diabetes can have life-saving effects. A closer analysis of studies in this area contributes to well-designed interventions. Objectives: We surveyed the effectiveness of interventional studies on type 2 diabetes in the last decade. Data Sources: The research papers were obtained from PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, SID, and Magiran for Persian and English language studies between 2010 and 2019. The PRISMA checklist was used to select the studies for systematic reviews. Study Selection: The criteria for article selection were experimental studies, quasi-experimental studies, clinical trials, and pre-treatment and post-treatment observations. Also, the exclusion criteria were case studies, short articles, cross-sectional studies, descriptive and analytic studies, letters to the editor, and systematic review papers. Finally, 24 studies (out of 1,374) were entered in our study. Data Extraction: An interventional study checklist was used to report the standard of studies: (1) consolidated standards of reporting trials with 25 items; (2) checklist for experimental design with nine items; (3) checklist for quasi-experimental studies with nine items; and (4) transparent reporting of evaluations with non-randomized designs with 22 items. Results: Twenty-four research papers entered the final analysis. Most studies were clinical trials with the intervention period ranging from one to 12 months. Patients were usually selected as the participants. The education interventions in most studies were lectures, questions/answers, group discussions, brainstorming, photo/film/slide display, group teaching, individual training, individual counseling, and group counseling. The main focus of the interventions was on physical activity and diet, with positive effects. Conclusions: Most interventions made on type 2 diabetes variables had positive effects. Therefore, it is recommended that in addition to diet and physical activity, other factors of type 2 diabetes be considered in educational interventions. Also, the most effective and appropriate teaching methods should be considered to prevent and control this disease.
2型糖尿病介入研究的有效性:十年系统回顾
背景:对2型糖尿病的教育干预可以起到挽救生命的作用。对这一领域的研究进行更仔细的分析有助于设计良好的干预措施。目的:我们调查了近十年来2型糖尿病介入研究的有效性。数据来源:2010年至2019年的波斯语和英语研究论文来自PubMed、Science Direct、Scopus、Web of Science、b谷歌Scholar、SID和Magiran。使用PRISMA检查表选择研究进行系统评价。研究选择:文章选择的标准为实验研究、准实验研究、临床试验、治疗前和治疗后观察。此外,排除标准还包括案例研究、短文、横断面研究、描述性和分析性研究、给编辑的信函和系统综述论文。最终,1,374项研究中有24项被纳入我们的研究。资料提取:采用干预性研究清单报告研究标准:(1)25项试验合并报告标准;(2)实验设计清单,共9项;(3)拟实验研究清单,共9项;(4) 22项非随机设计评价的透明报告。结果:24篇研究论文进入最终分析。大多数研究为临床试验,干预期为1 - 12个月。患者通常被选为参与者。大多数研究的教育干预是讲座、问答、小组讨论、头脑风暴、照片/影片/幻灯片展示、小组教学、个别培训、个别咨询和小组咨询。干预的主要重点是身体活动和饮食,有积极的影响。结论:大多数对2型糖尿病变量的干预都有积极的效果。因此,建议在教育干预中,除饮食和体育活动外,还应考虑2型糖尿病的其他因素。同时,应考虑最有效和最适当的教学方法来预防和控制这种疾病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health Scope
Health Scope PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
16.70%
发文量
34
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信