Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Study protocol

Comparison of active treatments for impaired glucose regulation: a Salford Royal Foundation Trust and Hitachi collaboration (CATFISH): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Authors: Peter A. Coventry, Peter Bower, Amy Blakemore, Liz Baker, Mark Hann, Angela Paisley, Charlotte Renwick, Jinshuo Li, Atushi Ugajin, Martin Gibson

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Diabetes is highly prevalent and contributes to significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Behaviour change interventions that target health and lifestyle factors associated with the onset of diabetes can delay progression to diabetes, but many approaches rely on intensive one-to-one contact by specialists. Health coaching is an approach based on motivational interviewing that can potentially deliver behaviour change interventions by non-specialists at a larger scale. This trial protocol describes a randomized controlled trial (CATFISH) that tests whether a web-enhanced telephone health coaching intervention (IGR3) is more acceptable and efficient than a telephone-only health coaching intervention (IGR2) for people with prediabetes (impaired glucose regulation).

Methods

CATFISH is a two-parallel group, single-centre individually randomized controlled trial. Eligible participants are patients aged ≥18 years with impaired glucose regulation (HbA1c concentration between 42 and 47 mmol/mol), have access to a telephone and home internet and have been referred to an existing telephone health coaching service at Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK. Participants who give written informed consent will be randomized remotely (via a clinical trials unit) to either the existing pathway (IGR2) or the new web-enhanced pathway (IGR3) for 9 months. The primary outcome measure is patient acceptability at 9 months, determined using the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures at 9 months are: cost of delivery of IGR2 and IGR3, mental health, quality of life, patient activation, self-management, weight (kg), HbA1c concentration, and body mass index. All outcome measures will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. A qualitative process evaluation will explore the experiences of participants and providers with a focus on understanding usability of interventions, mechanisms of behaviour change, and impact of context on delivery and user acceptability. Qualitative data will be analyzed using Framework.

Discussion

The CATFISH trial will provide a pragmatic assessment of whether a web-based information technology platform can enhance acceptability of a telephone health coaching intervention for people with prediabetes. The data will prove critical in understanding the role of web applications to improve engagement with evidence-based approaches to preventing diabetes.

Trial registration

ISRCTN16534814. Registered on 2 July 2015.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
go back to reference Diabetes UK. Facts and stats. London: Diabetes UK; 2015. Diabetes UK. Facts and stats. London: Diabetes UK; 2015.
3.
go back to reference Fowler MJ. Microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes. Clin Diabetes. 2008;26(2):77–82.CrossRef Fowler MJ. Microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes. Clin Diabetes. 2008;26(2):77–82.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Hex N, Bartlett C, Wright D, Taylor M, Varley D. Estimating the current and future costs of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the UK, including direct health costs and indirect societal and productivity costs. Diabet Med. 2012;29(7):855–62.CrossRefPubMed Hex N, Bartlett C, Wright D, Taylor M, Varley D. Estimating the current and future costs of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the UK, including direct health costs and indirect societal and productivity costs. Diabet Med. 2012;29(7):855–62.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Health and Social Care Information Centre. Statistics on obesity, physical activity and diet: England 2014. Leeds: Health and Social Care Information Centre; 2014. Health and Social Care Information Centre. Statistics on obesity, physical activity and diet: England 2014. Leeds: Health and Social Care Information Centre; 2014.
6.
go back to reference Bombelli M, Facchetti R, Sega R, Carugo S, Fodri D, Brambilla G, Giannattasio C, Grassi G, Mancia G. Impact of body mass index and waist circumference on the long-term risk of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and cardiac organ damage. Hypertension. 2011;58(6):1029–35.CrossRefPubMed Bombelli M, Facchetti R, Sega R, Carugo S, Fodri D, Brambilla G, Giannattasio C, Grassi G, Mancia G. Impact of body mass index and waist circumference on the long-term risk of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and cardiac organ damage. Hypertension. 2011;58(6):1029–35.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Santaguida PL BC, Hunt D, Morrison K, Gerstein H, Raina P, Booker L, Yazdi H. Diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of impaired glucose tolerance and impaired fasting glucose. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No 128. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2005. Santaguida PL BC, Hunt D, Morrison K, Gerstein H, Raina P, Booker L, Yazdi H. Diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of impaired glucose tolerance and impaired fasting glucose. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No 128. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2005.
8.
go back to reference Public Health England. A systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness of pragmatic lifestyle interventions for the prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus in routine practice. London: Public Health England; 2015. Public Health England. A systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness of pragmatic lifestyle interventions for the prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus in routine practice. London: Public Health England; 2015.
9.
go back to reference Palmer S, Tubbs I, Whybrow A. Health coaching to facilitate the promotion of healthy behaviour and achievement of health-related goals. Int J Health Promot Educ. 2003;41(3):91–3.CrossRef Palmer S, Tubbs I, Whybrow A. Health coaching to facilitate the promotion of healthy behaviour and achievement of health-related goals. Int J Health Promot Educ. 2003;41(3):91–3.CrossRef
10.
11.
go back to reference Kivela K, Elo S, Kyngas H, Kaariainen M. The effects of health coaching on adult patients with chronic diseases: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;97(2):147–57.CrossRefPubMed Kivela K, Elo S, Kyngas H, Kaariainen M. The effects of health coaching on adult patients with chronic diseases: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;97(2):147–57.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference McLean S, Sheikh A, Cresswell K, Nurmatov U, Mukherjee M, Hemmi A, Pagliari C. The impact of telehealthcare on the quality and safety of care: a systematic overview. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e71238.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral McLean S, Sheikh A, Cresswell K, Nurmatov U, Mukherjee M, Hemmi A, Pagliari C. The impact of telehealthcare on the quality and safety of care: a systematic overview. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e71238.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Hutchison AJ, Breckon JD. A review of telephone coaching services for people with long-term conditions. J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(8):451–8.CrossRefPubMed Hutchison AJ, Breckon JD. A review of telephone coaching services for people with long-term conditions. J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(8):451–8.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Steventon A, Tunkel S, Blunt I, Bardsley M. Effect of telephone health coaching (Birmingham OwnHealth) on hospital use and associated costs: cohort study with matched controls. BMJ. 2013;347:f4585.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Steventon A, Tunkel S, Blunt I, Bardsley M. Effect of telephone health coaching (Birmingham OwnHealth) on hospital use and associated costs: cohort study with matched controls. BMJ. 2013;347:f4585.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Young RJ, Taylor J, Friede T, Hollis S, Mason JM, Lee P, Burns E, Long AF, Gambling T, New JP, et al. Pro-active call center treatment support (PACCTS) to improve glucose control in type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(2):278–82.CrossRefPubMed Young RJ, Taylor J, Friede T, Hollis S, Mason JM, Lee P, Burns E, Long AF, Gambling T, New JP, et al. Pro-active call center treatment support (PACCTS) to improve glucose control in type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(2):278–82.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Savas LA, Grady K, Cotterill S, Summers L, Boaden R, Gibson JM. Prioritising prevention: implementation of IGT Care Call, a telephone based service for people at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Prim Care Diabetes. 2015;9(1):3–8.CrossRefPubMed Savas LA, Grady K, Cotterill S, Summers L, Boaden R, Gibson JM. Prioritising prevention: implementation of IGT Care Call, a telephone based service for people at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Prim Care Diabetes. 2015;9(1):3–8.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Sundiatu DSG, Thomas P, Angela S. Changing patient behavior: the next frontier in healthcare value. Health Int. 2012;12:65–73. Sundiatu DSG, Thomas P, Angela S. Changing patient behavior: the next frontier in healthcare value. Health Int. 2012;12:65–73.
19.
go back to reference Small N, Bower P, Chew-Graham CA, Whalley D, Protheroe J. Patient empowerment in long-term conditions: development and preliminary testing of a new measure. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13(1):1–15.CrossRef Small N, Bower P, Chew-Graham CA, Whalley D, Protheroe J. Patient empowerment in long-term conditions: development and preliminary testing of a new measure. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13(1):1–15.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Norman GJ, Zabinski MF, Adams MA, Rosenberg DE, Yaroch AL, Atienza AA. A review of eHealth interventions for physical activity and dietary behavior change. Am J Prev Med. 2007;33(4):336–45.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Norman GJ, Zabinski MF, Adams MA, Rosenberg DE, Yaroch AL, Atienza AA. A review of eHealth interventions for physical activity and dietary behavior change. Am J Prev Med. 2007;33(4):336–45.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference El-Gayar O, Timsina P, Nawar N, Eid W. A systematic review of IT for diabetes self-management: are we there yet? Int J Med Inform. 2013;82(8):637–52.CrossRefPubMed El-Gayar O, Timsina P, Nawar N, Eid W. A systematic review of IT for diabetes self-management: are we there yet? Int J Med Inform. 2013;82(8):637–52.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Sawesi S, Rashrash M, Phalakornkule K, Carpenter JS, Jones JF. The impact of information technology on patient engagement and health behavior change: a systematic review of the literature. JMIR Med Inform. 2016;4(1):e1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sawesi S, Rashrash M, Phalakornkule K, Carpenter JS, Jones JF. The impact of information technology on patient engagement and health behavior change: a systematic review of the literature. JMIR Med Inform. 2016;4(1):e1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG, Mann H, Berlin JA, Dickersin K, Hrobjartsson A, Schulz KF, Parulekar WR, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ. 2013;346:e7586.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG, Mann H, Berlin JA, Dickersin K, Hrobjartsson A, Schulz KF, Parulekar WR, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ. 2013;346:e7586.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, Laupacis A, Gotzsche PC, Krleza-Jeric K, Hrobjartsson A, Mann H, Dickersin K, Berlin JA, et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(3):200–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, Laupacis A, Gotzsche PC, Krleza-Jeric K, Hrobjartsson A, Mann H, Dickersin K, Berlin JA, et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(3):200–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
go back to reference Department for Communities and Local Government. The English indices of deprivation 2015. London: Department for Communities and Local Government; 2015. Department for Communities and Local Government. The English indices of deprivation 2015. London: Department for Communities and Local Government; 2015.
27.
go back to reference Campbell J, Smith P, Nissen S, Bower P, Elliott M, Roland M. The GP patient survey for use in primary care in the National Health Service in the UK – development and psychometric characteristics. BMC Fam Pract. 2009;10:57.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Campbell J, Smith P, Nissen S, Bower P, Elliott M, Roland M. The GP patient survey for use in primary care in the National Health Service in the UK – development and psychometric characteristics. BMC Fam Pract. 2009;10:57.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Office for National Statistics. Harmonised Concepts and Questions for Social Data Sources. Primary Principles. Ethnic Group. Version 3.3. London: Office for National Statistics; 2015. Office for National Statistics. Harmonised Concepts and Questions for Social Data Sources. Primary Principles. Ethnic Group. Version 3.3. London: Office for National Statistics; 2015.
29.
go back to reference Morris NS, MacLean CD, Chew LD, Littenberg B. The Single Item Literacy Screener: evaluation of a brief instrument to identify limited reading ability. BMC Fam Pract. 2006;7:21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Morris NS, MacLean CD, Chew LD, Littenberg B. The Single Item Literacy Screener: evaluation of a brief instrument to identify limited reading ability. BMC Fam Pract. 2006;7:21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Jeppesen KM, Coyle JD, Miser WF. Screening questions to predict limited health literacy: a cross-sectional study of patients with diabetes mellitus. Ann Fam Med. 2009;7(1):24–31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jeppesen KM, Coyle JD, Miser WF. Screening questions to predict limited health literacy: a cross-sectional study of patients with diabetes mellitus. Ann Fam Med. 2009;7(1):24–31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
go back to reference Bayliss EA, Ellis JL, Steiner JF. Seniors’ self-reported multimorbidity captured biopsychosocial factors not incorporated into two other data-based morbidity measures. J Clin Epidemiology. 2009;62(5):e551–557.CrossRef Bayliss EA, Ellis JL, Steiner JF. Seniors’ self-reported multimorbidity captured biopsychosocial factors not incorporated into two other data-based morbidity measures. J Clin Epidemiology. 2009;62(5):e551–557.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Attkisson CC, Zwick R. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire: psychometric properties and correlations with service utilization and psychotherapy outcome. Eval Program Plann. 1982;5(3):233–7.CrossRefPubMed Attkisson CC, Zwick R. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire: psychometric properties and correlations with service utilization and psychotherapy outcome. Eval Program Plann. 1982;5(3):233–7.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Coventry P, Lovell K, Dickens C, Bower P, Chew-Graham C, McElvenny D, Hann M, Cherrington A, Garrett C, Gibbons CJ, et al. Integrated primary care for patients with mental and physical multimorbidity: cluster randomised controlled trial of collaborative care for patients with depression comorbid with diabetes or cardiovascular disease. BMJ. 2015;350:h638.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Coventry P, Lovell K, Dickens C, Bower P, Chew-Graham C, McElvenny D, Hann M, Cherrington A, Garrett C, Gibbons CJ, et al. Integrated primary care for patients with mental and physical multimorbidity: cluster randomised controlled trial of collaborative care for patients with depression comorbid with diabetes or cardiovascular disease. BMJ. 2015;350:h638.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
go back to reference Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, Bonsel G, Badia X. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5 L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, Bonsel G, Badia X. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5 L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
go back to reference Berwick DM, Murphy JM, Goldman PA, Ware Jr JE, Barsky AJ, Weinstein MC. Performance of a five-item mental health screening test. Med Care. 1991;29(2):169–76.CrossRefPubMed Berwick DM, Murphy JM, Goldman PA, Ware Jr JE, Barsky AJ, Weinstein MC. Performance of a five-item mental health screening test. Med Care. 1991;29(2):169–76.CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Toobert DJ, Hampson SE, Glasgow RE. The summary of diabetes self-care activities measure: results from 7 studies and a revised scale. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(7):943–50.CrossRefPubMed Toobert DJ, Hampson SE, Glasgow RE. The summary of diabetes self-care activities measure: results from 7 studies and a revised scale. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(7):943–50.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Mahoney ER, Tusler M. Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv Res. 2004;39(4 Pt 1):1005–26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Mahoney ER, Tusler M. Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv Res. 2004;39(4 Pt 1):1005–26.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
38.
go back to reference Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stockard J, Tusler M. Development and testing of a short form of the Patient Activation Measure. Health Serv Res. 2005;40(6 Pt 1):1918–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stockard J, Tusler M. Development and testing of a short form of the Patient Activation Measure. Health Serv Res. 2005;40(6 Pt 1):1918–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
42.
go back to reference Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust. Prevention and management of potential exposure to blood borne viruses including needlestick and sharps injuries. Issue No. 4. Salford: Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust; 2015. Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust. Prevention and management of potential exposure to blood borne viruses including needlestick and sharps injuries. Issue No. 4. Salford: Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust; 2015.
43.
44.
go back to reference National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. Manchester: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2013. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. Manchester: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2013.
45.
go back to reference Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care 2013. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent; 2013. Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care 2013. Canterbury: Personal Social Services Research Unit, University of Kent; 2013.
46.
go back to reference Richardson G, Manca A. Calculation of quality adjusted life years in the published literature: a review of methodology and transparency. Health Econ. 2004;13(12):1203–10.CrossRefPubMed Richardson G, Manca A. Calculation of quality adjusted life years in the published literature: a review of methodology and transparency. Health Econ. 2004;13(12):1203–10.CrossRefPubMed
47.
go back to reference Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, Moore L, O’Cathain A, Tinati T, Wight D, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, Moore L, O’Cathain A, Tinati T, Wight D, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
48.
go back to reference Knowlton LW, Phillips CC. The logic model guidebook. better strategies for great results. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2013. Knowlton LW, Phillips CC. The logic model guidebook. better strategies for great results. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2013.
49.
go back to reference Bickman L, editor. Using program theory in evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1987. Bickman L, editor. Using program theory in evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1987.
50.
go back to reference Hibbard JH, Gilburt H. Supporting people to manage their health. An introduction to patient activation. London: The King’s Fund; 2014. Hibbard JH, Gilburt H. Supporting people to manage their health. An introduction to patient activation. London: The King’s Fund; 2014.
51.
go back to reference Greene J, Hibbard JH. Why does patient activation matter? An examination of the relationships between patient activation and health-related outcomes. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27(5):520–6.CrossRefPubMed Greene J, Hibbard JH. Why does patient activation matter? An examination of the relationships between patient activation and health-related outcomes. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27(5):520–6.CrossRefPubMed
52.
go back to reference Hibbard JH, Greene J. What the evidence shows about patient activation: better health outcomes and care experiences; fewer data on costs. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32(2):207–14.CrossRef Hibbard JH, Greene J. What the evidence shows about patient activation: better health outcomes and care experiences; fewer data on costs. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32(2):207–14.CrossRef
53.
go back to reference Kinney RL, Lemon SC, Person SD, Pagoto SL, Saczynski JS. The association between patient activation and medication adherence, hospitalization, and emergency room utilization in patients with chronic illnesses: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98(5):545–52.CrossRefPubMed Kinney RL, Lemon SC, Person SD, Pagoto SL, Saczynski JS. The association between patient activation and medication adherence, hospitalization, and emergency room utilization in patients with chronic illnesses: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98(5):545–52.CrossRefPubMed
54.
go back to reference WK Kellogg Foundation. Using logic models to bring together planning, evaluation, and action. Logic Model Development Guide. Battle Creek: WK Kellogg Foundation; 2004. WK Kellogg Foundation. Using logic models to bring together planning, evaluation, and action. Logic Model Development Guide. Battle Creek: WK Kellogg Foundation; 2004.
55.
go back to reference Venkatesh VMM, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003; n27:425–78. Venkatesh VMM, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003; n27:425–78.
56.
go back to reference Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess RG, editors. Analyzing qualitative data. London: Routledge; 1994. p. 173–94.CrossRef Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess RG, editors. Analyzing qualitative data. London: Routledge; 1994. p. 173–94.CrossRef
57.
go back to reference World Medical Association General Assembly. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects – Seoul amendment. Ferney-Voltaire: World Medical Association; 2008. World Medical Association General Assembly. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects – Seoul amendment. Ferney-Voltaire: World Medical Association; 2008.
58.
go back to reference Medical Research Council. Guidelines for good clinical practice in clinical trials. London: Medical Research Council; 1998. Medical Research Council. Guidelines for good clinical practice in clinical trials. London: Medical Research Council; 1998.
59.
go back to reference Taichman DB, Backus J, Baethge C, Bauchner H, de Leeuw PW, Drazen JM, Fletcher J, Frizelle FA, Groves T, Haileamlak A, et al. Sharing clinical trial data – a proposal from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(4):384–6.CrossRefPubMed Taichman DB, Backus J, Baethge C, Bauchner H, de Leeuw PW, Drazen JM, Fletcher J, Frizelle FA, Groves T, Haileamlak A, et al. Sharing clinical trial data – a proposal from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(4):384–6.CrossRefPubMed
60.
go back to reference Suksomboon N, Poolsup N, Nge YL. Impact of phone call intervention on glycemic control in diabetes patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized. controlled trials. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e89207.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Suksomboon N, Poolsup N, Nge YL. Impact of phone call intervention on glycemic control in diabetes patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized. controlled trials. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e89207.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Comparison of active treatments for impaired glucose regulation: a Salford Royal Foundation Trust and Hitachi collaboration (CATFISH): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Authors
Peter A. Coventry
Peter Bower
Amy Blakemore
Liz Baker
Mark Hann
Angela Paisley
Charlotte Renwick
Jinshuo Li
Atushi Ugajin
Martin Gibson
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1519-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Trials 1/2016 Go to the issue