糖尿病自我管理项目的过程评估框架:系统综述。

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Chinelo Nsobundu, Yeka W Nmadu, Nikita Sandeep Wagle, Ngalula Dolly Mwintshi, Mariam Olamide Salis, Margaret J Foster, Matthew Lee Smith, Marcia G Ory
{"title":"糖尿病自我管理项目的过程评估框架:系统综述。","authors":"Chinelo Nsobundu, Yeka W Nmadu, Nikita Sandeep Wagle, Ngalula Dolly Mwintshi, Mariam Olamide Salis, Margaret J Foster, Matthew Lee Smith, Marcia G Ory","doi":"10.1093/heapro/daaf096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This systematic review investigates the utilization and reporting of frameworks to guide process evaluations (PE) of diabetes self-management programmes (DSMPs). Constituting a subset of articles from a previously published systematic review, seven studies, comprising nine articles, met the inclusion criteria. The different approaches to manage diabetes were reflected in the study's characteristics and types of interventions. The quality of reporting differed even with the inclusion of evaluation frameworks, which affected the evidence's transferability and comparability. All studies cited their frameworks; yet, only a few gave thorough explanations and used the frameworks consistently throughout their research. A critical appraisal for reporting quality revealed a need for standardized guidelines to assess the thoroughness of framework utilization. Implications for practice include adopting a checklist of indicators to enhance reporting quality and encouraging uniformity in PE methodologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":54256,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion International","volume":"40 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Frameworks for process evaluations of diabetes self-management programs: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Chinelo Nsobundu, Yeka W Nmadu, Nikita Sandeep Wagle, Ngalula Dolly Mwintshi, Mariam Olamide Salis, Margaret J Foster, Matthew Lee Smith, Marcia G Ory\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/heapro/daaf096\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This systematic review investigates the utilization and reporting of frameworks to guide process evaluations (PE) of diabetes self-management programmes (DSMPs). Constituting a subset of articles from a previously published systematic review, seven studies, comprising nine articles, met the inclusion criteria. The different approaches to manage diabetes were reflected in the study's characteristics and types of interventions. The quality of reporting differed even with the inclusion of evaluation frameworks, which affected the evidence's transferability and comparability. All studies cited their frameworks; yet, only a few gave thorough explanations and used the frameworks consistently throughout their research. A critical appraisal for reporting quality revealed a need for standardized guidelines to assess the thoroughness of framework utilization. Implications for practice include adopting a checklist of indicators to enhance reporting quality and encouraging uniformity in PE methodologies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54256,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Promotion International\",\"volume\":\"40 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Promotion International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daaf096\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daaf096","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本系统综述调查了框架的使用和报告,以指导糖尿病自我管理规划(DSMPs)的过程评估(PE)。构成先前发表的系统综述文章的子集,7项研究,包括9篇文章,符合纳入标准。管理糖尿病的不同方法反映在研究的特征和干预类型中。即使纳入了评价框架,报告的质量也存在差异,这影响了证据的可转移性和可比性。所有的研究都引用了他们的框架;然而,只有少数人给出了彻底的解释,并在整个研究过程中始终如一地使用这些框架。对报告质量的重要评价表明,需要制定标准化的准则来评估框架利用的彻底性。对实践的影响包括采用指标清单以提高报告质量和鼓励私人股本方法的统一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Frameworks for process evaluations of diabetes self-management programs: a systematic review.

This systematic review investigates the utilization and reporting of frameworks to guide process evaluations (PE) of diabetes self-management programmes (DSMPs). Constituting a subset of articles from a previously published systematic review, seven studies, comprising nine articles, met the inclusion criteria. The different approaches to manage diabetes were reflected in the study's characteristics and types of interventions. The quality of reporting differed even with the inclusion of evaluation frameworks, which affected the evidence's transferability and comparability. All studies cited their frameworks; yet, only a few gave thorough explanations and used the frameworks consistently throughout their research. A critical appraisal for reporting quality revealed a need for standardized guidelines to assess the thoroughness of framework utilization. Implications for practice include adopting a checklist of indicators to enhance reporting quality and encouraging uniformity in PE methodologies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Promotion International
Health Promotion International Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
146
期刊介绍: Health Promotion International contains refereed original articles, reviews, and debate articles on major themes and innovations in the health promotion field. In line with the remits of the series of global conferences on health promotion the journal expressly invites contributions from sectors beyond health. These may include education, employment, government, the media, industry, environmental agencies, and community networks. As the thought journal of the international health promotion movement we seek in particular theoretical, methodological and activist advances to the field. Thus, the journal provides a unique focal point for articles of high quality that describe not only theories and concepts, research projects and policy formulation, but also planned and spontaneous activities, organizational change, as well as social and environmental development.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信