↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Self management interventions for type 2 diabetes in adult people with severe mental illness

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
446 Mendeley
Title
Self management interventions for type 2 diabetes in adult people with severe mental illness
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011361.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hayley McBain, Kathleen Mulligan, Mark Haddad, Chris Flood, Julia Jones, Alan Simpson

Abstract

People with severe mental illness are twice as likely to develop type 2 diabetes as those without severe mental illness. Treatment guidelines for type 2 diabetes recommend that structured education should be integrated into routine care and should be offered to all. However, for people with severe mental illness, physical health may be a low priority, and motivation to change may be limited. These additional challenges mean that the findings reported in previous systematic reviews of diabetes self management interventions may not be generalised to those with severe mental illness, and that tailored approaches to effective diabetes education may be required for this population. To assess the effects of diabetes self management interventions specifically tailored for people with type 2 diabetes and severe mental illness. We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, ClinicalTrials.gov and grey literature. The date of the last search of all databases was 07 March 2016. Randomised controlled trials of diabetes self management interventions for people with type 2 diabetes and severe mental illness. Two review authors independently screened abstracts and full-text articles, extracted data and conducted the risk of bias assessment. We used a taxonomy of behaviour change techniques and the framework for behaviour change theory to describe the theoretical basis of the interventions and active ingredients. We used the GRADE method (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) to assess trials for overall quality of evidence. We included one randomised controlled trial involving 64 participants with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The average age of participants was 54 years; participants had been living with type 2 diabetes for on average nine years, and with their psychiatric diagnosis since they were on average 28 years of age. Investigators evaluated the 24-week Diabetes Awareness and Rehabilitation Training (DART) programme in comparison with usual care plus information (UCI). Follow-up after trial completion was six months. Risk of bias was mostly unclear but was high for selective reporting. Trial authors did not report on diabetes-related complications, all-cause mortality, adverse events, health-related quality of life nor socioeconomic effects. Twelve months of data on self care behaviours as measured by total energy expenditure showed a mean of 2148 kcal for DART and 1496 kcal for UCI (52 participants; very low-quality evidence), indicating no substantial improvement. The intervention did not have a substantial effect on glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) at 6 or 12 months of follow-up (12-month HbA1c data 7.9% for DART vs 6.9% for UCI; 52 participants; very low-quality evidence). Researchers noted small improvements in body mass index immediately after the intervention was provided and at six months, along with improved weight post intervention. Diabetes knowledge and self efficacy improved immediately following receipt of the intervention, and knowledge also at six months. The intervention did not improve blood pressure. Evidence is insufficient to show whether type 2 diabetes self management interventions for people with severe mental illness are effective in improving outcomes. Researchers must conduct additional trials to establish efficacy, and to identify the active ingredients in these interventions and the people most likely to benefit from them.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 446 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 443 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 90 20%
Student > Bachelor 62 14%
Researcher 46 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 7%
Other 66 15%
Unknown 117 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 108 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 83 19%
Psychology 46 10%
Social Sciences 20 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 2%
Other 53 12%
Unknown 128 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 November 2021.
All research outputs
#3,539,264
of 21,055,026 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,049
of 12,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,751
of 278,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#100
of 185 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,055,026 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.6. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,870 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 185 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.