糖尿病自我管理项目的过程评估:文献系统评价。
Process Evaluations of Diabetes Self-Management Programs: A Systematic Review of the Literature.
机构信息
Center for Community Health & Aging, School of Public Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
School of Medicine, St George's University, St George's, Grenada.
出版信息
Am J Health Promot. 2024 Sep;38(7):1048-1067. doi: 10.1177/08901171241238554. Epub 2024 Apr 22.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review of process evaluations (PEs) of diabetes self-management programs (DSMPs).
DATA SOURCE
An electronic search using Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (Ensco), Academic Search (Ebsco), and APA PsycInfo (Ebsco).
STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA
Peer-reviewed, empirical quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method studies were included if they (1) were a traditional, group-based DSMP, (2) involved adults at least 18 years with T1DM or T2DM, (3) were a stand-alone or embedded PE, and (4) published in English.
DATA EXTRACTION
The following process evaluation outcomes were extracted: fidelity, dose delivered, dose received, reach, recruitment, retention, and context. Additional items were extracted, (eg, process evaluation type, data collection methods; theories; frameworks or conceptual models used to guide the process evaluation, and etc).
DATA SYNTHESIS
Due to heterogeneity across studies, studies were synthesized qualitatively (narratively).
RESULTS
Sixty-eight studies (k) in 78 articles (n) (k = 68; n = 78) were included. Most were mixed methods of low quality. Studies were typically integrated into outcome evaluations vs being stand-alone, lacked theoretical approaches to guide them, and incorporated limited outcomes such as dose received, reach, and retention.
CONCLUSION
Future research should 1) implement stand-alone theoretically grounded PE studies and 2) provide a shared understanding of standardized guidelines to conduct PEs. This will allow public health practitioners and researchers to assess and compare the quality of different programs to be implemented.
目的
对糖尿病自我管理计划(DSMP)的过程评估(PE)进行系统评价。
资料来源
使用 Medline(Ovid)、Embase(Ovid)、CINAHL(Ensco)、Academic Search(Ebsco)和 APA PsycInfo(Ebsco)进行电子检索。
研究纳入和排除标准
如果符合以下标准,则纳入同行评审的实证定量、定性或混合方法研究:(1)为传统的、基于小组的 DSMP;(2)涉及至少 18 岁的 T1DM 或 T2DM 成年患者;(3)为独立或嵌入式 PE;(4)以英文发表。
资料提取
提取了以下过程评估结果:保真度、提供的剂量、接受的剂量、覆盖范围、招募、保留和背景。还提取了其他项目,例如过程评估类型、数据收集方法;理论;用于指导过程评估的框架或概念模型等。
资料综合
由于研究之间存在异质性,因此对研究进行了定性综合(叙述性)。
结果
共纳入 78 篇文章中的 68 项研究(k = 68;n = 78)。大多数研究为质量较低的混合方法。这些研究通常与结果评估相结合,而不是独立进行,缺乏指导它们的理论方法,并且仅纳入了接受剂量、覆盖范围和保留等有限的结果。
结论
未来的研究应 1)实施独立的基于理论的 PE 研究,2)提供进行 PE 的标准化指南的共同理解。这将使公共卫生从业人员和研究人员能够评估和比较不同计划的质量,以进行实施。