MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2578942704 · doi:10.5339/qfarc.2016.hbsp1171

Using the Transtheoretical Model to Enhance Self-management Activities in Type 2 Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review

2016· review· en· W2578942704 on OpenAlex
Yara Arafat

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueQatar Foundation Annual Research Conference Proceedings Volume 2016 Issue 1 · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranstheoretical modelBehavior changeHealth promotionPromotion (chess)Psychological interventionDiseaseBehaviour changeRegulatory focus theoryPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)Self-managementApplied psychologyMedicineType 2 diabetesChronic diseaseDiabetes mellitusGerontologyComputer scienceSocial psychologyNursingPublic healthFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Many health organizations are always highlighting the importance of health promotion, and disease prevention, due to the high incidence of chronic diseases that are spread worldwide and increasing continuously. One of the most prevalent chronic diseases is diabetes mellitus (DM). Many studies conducted in developed countries proved that lifestyle changes in patients resulted in a reduction in the prevalence of diabetes, and that there's a link between DM, and behavioral, clinical, and economical outcomes. Furthermore there was an affiliation between knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP), and DM. Even though self-management of type 2 diabetes is necessary in order to improve quality of life, many patients still have a problem with being able to self-manage diabetes. Many models and interventions were tested to enhance self-management but none were successful so far. Self-management is a socio-behavioral problem, and the use of a model such as the transtheoretical model (TTM) could improve it. TTM is one of the most commonly used behavioral models. It was first introduced in the 1980s by Prochaska and DiClemente to explain how people change their behavior, but not why they change. It is a model of choice that focuses on the decision making capabilities of individuals. This model is different to alternative approaches to health promotion in that its primarily focus is not on social and biological behavioural influences. It is a psychological health promotion model about the intention of change. It is a model of choice that focuses on the decision making capabilities of individuals. It first uses the baseline information, with an aim to alter self-efficacy, cues, or other psychosocial factors using five TTM principles: Precontemplation, Contemplation, Preparation, Action, and Maintenance. Objective: The objective of this study is to collect enough evidence using a systematic review in order to assess the use of TTM in improving self-management activities in type 2 diabetic patients. Self-management activities include following a healthier diet, exercising more regularly, and an enhanced medication adherence. Methods: The systematic review was conducted between February and May 2015. PubMed (n = 83), Medline (n = 126), Science direct (n = 985), and Cochrane (n = 62) were the databases searched with predefined terms relating to TTM interventions for type 2 diabetic patients. A second extensive search was conducted using google, and google scholar (n = 2) to retrieve articles relevant to the research. The search strategy aimed to identify articles in which the Transtheoretical model had been applied and which had been published in English between 2000 and March 2015. In order to ensure that all potentially relevant articles had been identified, the search terms included “Transtheoretical model”, “Sociobehavioral”, “social changes”, “diabetes”, and “self-management”. All study designs were included and no limits were set to articles comparing the behavioral model to other approaches. The methods used for this review followed the PRISMA statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). The systematic search was conducted in March 2015. The initial search of the above strategy yielded 1,153 articles. These articles were reviewed by the primary author for relevance to the aims of the review. Retained articles were then assessed for relevance to the aims based on the title and the abstract using the inclusion criteria. Articles identified as potential for inclusion were then retrieved. Each step during the selection process was conducted by two researchers, and in case of disagreement, consensus would be reached with the aid of a third researcher. Results: There was consensus in the review team that the 10 papers met the inclusion criteria. The 10 studies included were published between 2003 and 2011, and were conducted in the US (n = 6), Canada (n = 1), Trinidad and Tobago (n = 1), Scotland (n = 1), and one was unspecified. In all 10 studies, the majority of participants at baseline were at the Precontemplation/Contemplation or Preparation stage, and after the TTM intervention the majority of patients were at the Action or Maintenance stage. Four studies did not specify which stage had the highest number of participants at baseline and post TTM intervention. In one study, the highest number of participants was at the preparation stage (39.1%) at baseline, and after the TTM intervention the highest number of patients was in the action phase (45.7%) indicating an advancement through the stages of change. Moreover, in 4 studies most of the patients at baseline were in the pre-action stage, but at follow-up after the TTM interventions most of the participants moved to the action or maintenance stage. In one study, the greatest number of participants was at the action/maintenance stage pre- and post- the TTM intervention. All studies demonstrated some positive outcomes self-management due to implementing TTM. Four studies reported a significant reduction in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), 5 studies reported improvements in diet after TTM, and Participants exercised more in 2 studies. In one study there was progress towards reaching participants’ goals whether it's better adherence, diet, or more exercise. However, using the TTM had no change on medication use in any of the studies included. Moreover, Different study designs were used in all studies. 2 studies were pre-test/post-test. In addition, there were 3 Randomized controlled trials (1 was an RCT, 1 was a randomized split plot design where there was a group receiving the usual care and another receiving the intervention, and another study was a cohort randomized controlled prospective trial). One study was a quasi-experimental study. Three studies were reviews; one was a preliminary study which is an economic evaluation of a theoretical cohort of patients. The other one was a study describing how resources and supports for self-management (RSSM) and strategies of the transtheoretical model intersect to produce a comprehensive approach resulting in cutting-edge diabetes Program, and the last review was determining the impact of TTM in changing the unhealthy dietary habits of type 2 diabetic patients. Moreover, one article followed a cross sectional study design which consisted of questionnaires. Conclusion: Ten articles using TTM to self-manage type 2 diabetes were identified and critically reviewed. The narrative findings from this systematic review provide evidence that TTM interventions are effective in promoting exercise, and encouraging participants to pursue a healthier diet. However, the effect of TTM on medication adherence has not been clearly identified yet, and it should be studied in future research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.353 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it