Diabetes health coach in individuals with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta analysis of quadruple aim outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: As diabetes self-management necessitates life-long learning, behaviour change, support, and monitoring, health coaching is a promising intervention to assist individuals in more than just meeting glycemic goals and glycated hemoglobin (A1C) targets. Currently, studies of health coaching for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are limited due to their emphasis on glycemic control. The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the effects of health coaching on adults with T2DM based on quadruple aim outcomes and to assess the implementation of these interventions. Methods: We searched 6 databases for randomized controlled trials of health coaching interventions delivered by a health professional for adults with T2DM. Reviewers screened citations, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence (GRADE). We assessed statistical and methodological heterogeneity and performed a meta-analysis of studies. Results: Nine studies were included in this review. Our meta-analysis showed a significant reduction of A1C [0.24 (95% CI, -0.38 to -0.09)] after exposure to diabetes health coaching, and small to trivial significant benefits for BMI, waist circumference, body weight, and depression/distress immediately post intervention based on moderate certainty of evidence. However, long term benefit of these clinical outcomes were not maintained at follow-up timepoints. There was a small significant benefit for systolic blood pressure which was maintained after the completion of health coaching exposure at follow-up, but there was no statistically significant benefit in other secondary outcomes such as diastolic blood pressure and lipid profile measures (e.g. triglycerides). Very few studies reported on other quadruple aim measures such as patient-reported outcomes, cost of care, and healthcare provider experience. Conclusions: Our systematic review and meta-analysis shows that health coaching interventions can have short term impact beyond glucose control on cardiometabolic and mental health outcomes. Future studies should try to examine quadruple aim outcomes to better assess the benefit and impact of these interventions at longer time points and following termination of the coaching program. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier (CRD42022347478).
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".