Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Diabetes | Study protocol

Improving glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus through a peer support instant messaging service intervention (DiabPeerS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Authors: Elisabeth Höld, Johanna Grüblbauer, Martin Wiesholzer, Daniela Wewerka-Kreimel, Stefan Stieger, Werner Kuschei, Philip Kisser, Elisabeth Gützer, Ursula Hemetek, Astrid Ebner-Zarl, Jürgen Pripfl

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2022

Abstract

Background

Diabetes mellitus is one of the four priority non-communicable diseases worldwide. It can lead to serious long-term complications and produces significant costs. Due to the chronicle character of the disease, it requires continuous medical treatment and good therapy adherence of those suffering. Therefore, diabetes self-management education (DSME) (and support DSMES) plays a significant role to increase patient’s self-management capacity and improve diabetes therapy. Research indicates that these outcomes might be difficult to maintain. Consequently, effective strategies to preserve the positive effects of DSMES are needed. Preliminary results show that peer support, which means support from a person who has experiential knowledge of a specific behavior or stressor and similar characteristics as the target population, is associated with better outcomes in terms of HbA_1c, cardiovascular disease risk factors or self-efficacy at a lower cost compared to standard therapy. Peer-supported instant messaging services (IMS) approaches have significant potential for diabetes management because support can be provided easily and prompt, is inexpensive, and needs less effort to attend compared to standard therapy. The major objective of the study is to analyze the impact of a peer-supported IMS intervention in addition to a standard diabetes therapy on the glycemic control of type 2 diabetic patients.

Methods

A total of 205 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus will be included and randomly assigned to an intervention or control group. Both groups will receive standard therapy, but the intervention group will participate in the peer-supported IMS intervention, additionally. The duration of the intervention will last for 7 months, followed by a follow-up of 7 months. Biochemical, behavioral, and psychosocial parameters will be measured before, in the middle, and after the intervention as well as after the follow-up.

Discussion

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and other non-communicable diseases put healthcare systems worldwide to the test. Peer-supported IMS interventions in addition to standard therapy might be part of new and cost-effective approaches to support patients independent from time and place.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.govNCT04797429. Registered on 15 March 2021.

World Health Organization: Global report on diabetes. Geneva: WHO; 2016. https://apps.who.int/iris/rest/bitstreams/909883/retrieve. Accessed 4 Jan 2022.

International Diabetes Federation: IDF Diabetes Atlas. Ninth edition 2019. Brussels: IDF; 2019. https://www.diabetesatlas.org/upload/resources/material/20200302_133351_IDFATLAS9e-final-web.pdf. Accessed 20 Nov 2020.

Schmutterer I, Delcour J, Griebler R. Österreichischer Diabetesbericht 2017. Vienna: Bundesministerium für Gesundheit und Frauen; 2017. https://www.sozialministerium.at/dam/jcr:630d810c-e02b-4c62-a2d9-5913ae0314ed/Diabetesbericht%202017.pdf.

Österreichische Diabetes Gesellschaft. Diabetes mellitus - Anleitungen für die Praxis. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2019;131(Suppl 1):1–246.

Bommer C, Heesemann E, Sagalova V, Manne-Goehler J, Atun R, Bärnighausen T, et al. The global economic burden of diabetes in adults aged 20-79 years: a cost-of-illness study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5(6):423–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30097-9.CrossRefPubMed

American Diabetes Association. Economic Costs of Diabetes in the U.S. in 2017. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(5):917–28.CrossRefPubMedCentral

Funnell MM, Anderson RM. The Problem With Compliance in Diabetes. JAMA. 2000;284(13):1709. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.284.13.1709-JMS1004-6-1.CrossRefPubMed

American Diabetes Association. 5. Facilitating Behavior Change and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes - 2020. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(Suppl 1):S48–65.

International Diabetes Federation: Global Guideline for Type 2 Diabetes. Brussels: IDF; 2012. https://www.idf.org/component/attachments/attachments.html?id=725&task=download. Accessed 4 Jan 2022.

10.

Paulweber B, Valensi P, Lindström J, Lalic NM, Greaves CJ, McKee M, et al. A European Evidence-Based Guideline for the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes. Horm Metab Res. 2010;42(Supp 1):3–36. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1240928.CrossRef

11.

Powers MA, Bardsley JK, Cypress M, Funnell MM, Harms D, Hess-Fischl A, et al. Diabetes Self-management Education and Support in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: A Consensus Report of the American Diabetes Association, the Association of Diabetes Care & Education Specialists, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Academy of PAs, the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, and the American Pharmacists Association. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(7):1636–49.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Mulcahy K, Maryniuk M, Peeples M, Peyrot M, Tomky D, Weaver T, et al. Diabetes self-management education core outcomes measures. Diabetes Educ. 2003;29(5):768–88.

13.

Bekele BB, Negash S, Bogale B, Tesfaye M, Getachew D, Weldekidan F, et al. Effect of diabetes self-management education (DSME) on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level among patients with T2DM: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2021;15(1):177–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsx.2020.12.030.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Odgers-Jewell K, Ball LE, Kelly JT, Isenring EA, Reidlinger DP, Thomas R. Effectiveness of group-based self-management education for individuals with Type 2 diabetes: a systematic review with meta-analyses and meta-regression. Diabet Med J Br Diabet Assoc. 2017;34(8):1027–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.13340.CrossRef

15.

Tanaka R, Shibayama T, Sugimoto K, Hidaka K. Diabetes self-management education and support for adults with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2020;169:108480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2020.108480.CrossRefPubMed

16.

World Health Organization. Use of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011;93(3):299–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2011.03.012.CrossRef

17.

He X, Li J, Wang B, Yao Q, Li L, Song R, et al. Diabetes self-management education reduces risk of all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endocrine. 2017;55(3):712–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-016-1168-2.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Minet L, Møller S, Vach W, Wagner L, Henriksen JE. Mediating the effect of self-care management intervention in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of 47 randomised controlled trials. Patient Educ Couns. 2010;80(1):29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2009.09.033.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Steinsbekk A, Rygg LØ, Lisulo M, Rise MB, Fretheim A. Group based diabetes self-management education compared to routine treatment for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. A systematic review with meta-analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12(1):213. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-213.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Norris SL, Lau J, Smith SJ, Schmid CH, Engelgau MM. Self-management education for adults with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of the effect on glycemic control. Diabetes Care. 2002;25(7):1159–71. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.25.7.1159.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Shumaker SA, Brownell A. Toward a Theory of Social Support: Closing Conceptual Gaps. J Soc Issues. 1984;40(4):11–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1984.tb01105.x.CrossRef

22.

Song Y, Nam S, Park S, Shin I-S, Ku BJ. The Impact of Social Support on Self-care of Patients With Diabetes: What Is the Effect of Diabetes Type? Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Diabetes Educ. 2017;43(4):396–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145721717712457.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Wang X, He L, Zhu K, Zhang S, Xin L, Xu W, et al. An integrated model to evaluate the impact of social support on improving self-management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2019;19(1):197.

24.

Powers MA, Bardsley J, Cypress M, Duker P, Funnell MM, Fischl AH, et al. Diabetes Self-management Education and Support in Type 2 Diabetes: A Joint Position Statement of the American Diabetes Association, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. Clin Diabetes Publ Am Diabetes Assoc. 2016;34(2):70–80. https://doi.org/10.2337/diaclin.34.2.70.CrossRef

25.

Dennis C-L. Peer support within a health care context: a concept analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2003;40(3):321–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7489(02)00092-5.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Gatlin TK, Serafica R, Johnson M. Systematic review of peer education intervention programmes among individuals with type 2 diabetes. J Clin Nurs. 2017;26(23–24):4212–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13991.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Patil SJ, Ruppar T, Koopman RJ, Lindbloom EJ, Elliott SG, Mehr DR, et al. Peer Support Interventions for Adults With Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis of Hemoglobin A1c Outcomes. Ann Fam Med. 2016;14(6):540–51. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1982.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Patil SJ, Ruppar T, Koopman RJ, Lindbloom EJ, Elliott SG, Mehr DR, et al. Effect of peer support interventions on cardiovascular disease risk factors in adults with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):398. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5326-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Dale JR, Williams SM, Bowyer V. What is the effect of peer support on diabetes outcomes in adults? A systematic review. Diabet Med J Br Diabet Assoc. 2012;29(11):1361–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2012.03749.x.CrossRef

30.

Johansson T, Keller S, Winkler H, Ostermann T, Weitgasser R, Sönnichsen AC. Effectiveness of a Peer Support Programme versus Usual Care in Disease Management of Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 regarding Improvement of Metabolic Control: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial. J Diabetes Res. 2016;3248547:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/3248547.CrossRef

31.

World Health Organization. mHealth: new horizons for health through mobile technologies: second global survey on eHealth. Geneva: WHO; 2011. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/44607. Accessed 19 Mar 2021.

32.

Eberle C, Stichling S, Löhnert M. Diabetology 4.0: Scoping Review of Novel Insights and Possibilities Offered by Digitalization. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(3):e23475.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Morris C, Scott RE, Mars M. Security and Other Ethical Concerns of Instant Messaging in Healthcare. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2018;254:77–85. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-914-0-77.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Kitsiou S, Paré G, Jaana M, Gerber B. Effectiveness of mHealth interventions for patients with diabetes: An overview of systematic reviews. PloS One. 2017;12(3):e0173160. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173160.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Wang Y, Min J, Khuri J, Xue H, Xie B, Kaminsky L, et al. Effectiveness of Mobile Health Interventions on Diabetes and Obesity Treatment and Management: Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews. JMIR MHealth UHealth. 2020;8(4):e15400.

36.

Gabarron E, Årsand E, Wynn R. Social Media Use in Interventions for Diabetes: Rapid Evidence-Based Review. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(8):e10303. https://doi.org/10.2196/10303.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Vorderstrasse A, Lewinski A, Melkus GD, Johnson C. Social Support for Diabetes Self-Management via eHealth Interventions. Curr Diab Rep. 2016;16(7):56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-016-0756-0.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Statistik Austria: Erhebung über den IKT-Einsatz in Haushalten 2020. Vienna: Statistik Austria; 2020. http://www.statistik.at/web_de/statistiken/energie_umwelt_innovation_mobilitaet/informationsgesellschaft/ikt-einsatz_in_haushalten/024571.html.

39.

Tang TS, Funnell M, Sinco B, Piatt G, Palmisano G, Spencer MS, et al. Comparative effectiveness of peer leaders and community health workers in diabetes self-management support: results of a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(6):1525–34. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc13-2161.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Giordano V, Koch H, Godoy-Santos A, Dias Belangero W, Esteves Santos Pires R, Labronici P. WhatsApp Messenger as an Adjunctive Tool for Telemedicine: An Overview. Interact J Med Res. 2017;6(2):e11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Kleinberger JW, Pollin TI. Personalized medicine in diabetes mellitus: current opportunities and future prospects. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2015;1346(1):45–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12757.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Scheen AJ. Precision medicine: The future in diabetes care? Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2016;117:12–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2016.04.033.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Dugas M, Crowley K, Gao GG, Xu T, Agarwal R, Kruglanski AW, et al. Individual differences in regulatory mode moderate the effectiveness of a pilot mHealth trial for diabetes management among older veterans. PLOS ONE. 2018;13(3):e0192807. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192807.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Klein WMP, Rothman AJ, Cameron LD. Theoretical innovations in social and personality psychology and implications for health: introduction to special issue. Health Psychol Off J Div Health Psychol Am Psychol Assoc. 2013;32(5):457–9. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032386.CrossRef

45.

Montag C, Błaszkiewicz K, Sariyska R, Lachmann B, Andone I, Trendafilov B, et al. Smartphone usage in the 21st century: who is active on WhatsApp? BMC Res Notes. 2015;8(1):331. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1280-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

46.

Amt der NÖ Landesregierung: Bevölkerungsstruktur 2020. Zahlen Fakten, St. Pölten. 2021. https://www.noe.gv.at/noe/Zahlen-Fakten/Bevstruktur_Alter_2020.xlsx. Accessed 28 May 2021.

47.

Statistik Austria: Bevölkerung. Vienna: Statistik Austria; 2021. http://pic.statistik.at/web_de/statistiken/menschen_und_gesellschaft/bevoelkerung/index.html.

48.

Smith PC, Schmidt SM, Allensworth-Davies D, Saitz R. A Single-Question Screening Test for Drug Use in Primary Care. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(13):1155–60. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2010.140.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

49.

American Diabetes Association. 4. Lifestyle Management: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2018. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(Supplement 1):S38–50.CrossRef

50.

Atreja A, Bellam N, Levy SR. Strategies to Enhance Patient Adherence: Making it Simple. Med Gen Med. 2005;7(1):4.

51.

Matsui D. Strategies to Measure and Improve Patient Adherence in Clinical Trials. Pharm Med. 2009;23(5):289–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03256784.CrossRef

52.

Riedl R, Robausch M, Berghold A. The Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Austrians Disease Management Program in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus - A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study. PLOS ONE. 2016;11(8):e0161429. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0161429.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

53.

Fydrich T, Sommer G, Brähler E. Fragebogen zu Sozialen Unterstützung. 1st ed. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2007.

54.

Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In: Weinman J, Wright S, Johnston M, editors. Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio Causal and control beliefs. Winsor: NFER-NELSON; 1995. p. 35–7.

55.

Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(9):606–13. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

56.

Polonsky WH, Fisher L, Earles J, Dudl RJ, Lees J, Mullan J, et al. Assessing Psychosocial Distress in Diabetes: Development of the Diabetes Distress Scale. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(3):626–31. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.28.3.626.CrossRefPubMed

57.

Morfeld M, Kirchberger I, Bullinger M. SF-36 Fragebogen zum Gesundheitszustand. 2nd ed. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2011.

58.

Collins GS, Mughal S, Barnett AH, Fitzgerald J, Lloyd CE. Modification and validation of the Revised Diabetes Knowledge Scale. Diabet Med. 2010;28(3):306-10.

59.

Jank S, Bertsche T, Schellberg D, Herzog W, Haefeli WE. The A14-scale: development and evaluation of a questionnaire for assessment of adherence and individual barriers. Pharm World Sci. 2009;31(4):426–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-009-9296-x.CrossRefPubMed

60.

IPAQ International Questionnaire. Downloadable questionnaires. not dated. https://sites.google.com/site/theipaq/questionnaire_links. Accessed 31 August 2018.

61.

Lee PH, Macfarlane DJ, Lam TH, Stewart SM. Validity of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form (IPAQ-SF): a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:115.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

62.

Kamradt M, Bozorgmehr K, Krisam J, Freund T, Kiel M, Qreini M, et al. Assessing self-management in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 in Germany: validation of a German version of the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities measure (SDSCA-G). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12(1):185. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-014-0185-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

63.

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. Conference of European Statisticians Recommendations for the 2020 Censuses of Population and Housing. New York and Geneva: UNECE; 2015. https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/stats/publications/2015/ECECES41_EN.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2021.

64.

Danner D, Rammstedt B, Bluemke M, Lechner C, Berres S, Knopf T, et al. Das Big-Five Inventar 2: Validierung eines Persönlichkeitsinventars zur Erfassung von 5 Persönlichkeitsdomänen und 15 Facetten. Diagnostica. 2019;65(3):121–32. https://doi.org/10.1026/0012-1924/a000218.CrossRef

65.

Hughes DJ, Rowe M, Batey M, Lee A. A tale of two sites: Twitter vs. Facebook and the personality predictors of social media usage. Comput Hum Behav. 2012;28(2):561–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.001.CrossRef

66.

Pittman M. Phoneliness: Examining the relationships between mobile social media, personality and loneliness [dissertation]. Oregon: University of Oregon Graduate School; 2017. https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/22699. Accessed 15 June 2021.

67.

Röhner J, Schütz A. Ein integratives Kommunikationsmodell nach Hargie und Kollegen. In: Röhner J, Schütz A, editors. Psychologie der Kommunikation (Basiswissen Psychologie). 2nd ed. Wiesbaden: Springer VS; 2016. p. 39–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-10024-7_3.CrossRef

68.

Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A-G, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175–91. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146.CrossRefPubMed

69.

Azami G, Soh KL, Sazlina SG, Salmiah MS, Aazami S, Mozafari M, et al. Effect of a Nurse-Led Diabetes Self-Management Education Program on Glycosylated Hemoglobin among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes. J Diabetes Res. 2018;2018:4930157–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4930157.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

70.

Gagliardino JJ, Arrechea V, Assad D, Gagliardino GG, González L, Lucero S, et al. Type 2 diabetes patients educated by other patients perform at least as well as patients trained by professionals: Peer Diabetes Education. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2013;29(2):152–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.2368.CrossRefPubMed

71.

Tshiananga JKT, Kocher S, Weber C, Erny-Albrecht K, Berndt K, Neeser K. The effect of nurse-led diabetes self-management education on glycosylated hemoglobin and cardiovascular risk factors: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Educ. 2012;38(1):108–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145721711423978.CrossRefPubMed

72.

Mother-Child-Booklet [Internet]. Vienna: Bundesministerium für Digitalisierung und Wirtschaftsstandort. 2021. https://www.help.gv.at/Portal.Node/hlpd/public/content/143/Seite.1430100.html#child. Accessed 4 January 2022.

73.

Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS. 3rd ed. London: Sage Publications Ltd; 2009.

74.

Medical University of Vienna: Good Scientific Practice. Ethics in Science and Research. Guidelines of the Medical University of Vienna. Vienna: Medical University of Vienna; 2017. https://www.meduniwien.ac.at/web/fileadmin/content/forschung/pdf/MedUni_Wien_GSP-Richtlinien_2017.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2021.

75.

Sathish T, Kapoor N, Cao Y, Tapp RJ, Zimmet P. Proportion of newly diagnosed diabetes in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2021;23(3):870–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.14269.CrossRefPubMed

76.

Parekh N, Deierlein AL. Health behaviours during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: implications for obesity. Public Health Nutr. 2020;23(17):3121–5. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980020003031.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

77.

Zupo R, Castellana F, Sardone R, Sila A, Giagulli VA, Triggiani V, et al. Preliminary Trajectories in Dietary Behaviors during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Public Health Call to Action to Face Obesity. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(19):7073.

Title: Improving glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus through a peer support instant messaging service intervention (DiabPeerS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Authors: Elisabeth Höld
Johanna Grüblbauer
Martin Wiesholzer
Daniela Wewerka-Kreimel
Stefan Stieger
Werner Kuschei
Philip Kisser
Elisabeth Gützer
Ursula Hemetek
Astrid Ebner-Zarl
Jürgen Pripfl
Publication date: 01-12-2022
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Diabetes
Type 2 Diabetes
Published in: Trials / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06202-2

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Improving glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus through a peer support instant messaging service intervention (DiabPeerS): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Background

Methods

Discussion

Trial registration

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Discussion

Trial registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Advancing cluster randomised trials in children’s therapy: a survey of the acceptability of trial behaviours to therapists and parents

Randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of various washout policies versus no washout policy in preventing catheter associated complications in adults living with long-term catheters: study protocol for the CATHETER II study

The use of standardized Brazilian green propolis extract (EPP-AF) as an adjunct treatment for hospitalized COVID-19 patients (BeeCovid2): a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Effect of high-flow nasal therapy on patient-centred outcomes in patients at high risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after cardiac surgery: a statistical analysis plan for NOTACS, a multicentre adaptive randomised controlled trial

Effect of vibration associated with cryotherapy on vaccine-related pain and anxiety levels in adults: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial

Smartphone-RCCT: an online repository of randomized controlled clinical trials of smartphone applications for chronic conditions