MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415993323 · doi:10.1186/s12889-025-24721-w

Effects of therapeutic patient education interventions on diabetes self-management outcomes in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: a systematic review

2025· review· en· W4415993323 on OpenAlexaff
Dayana El Chaar, Hicham El Berri, Matilda Byström, Eiman Hag, Lamia Mahmoud, Asmus Hammerich, Zoltan Pataky, Jorge César Correia, Cosette Fakih El Khoury

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsCanada Research Chairs
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionPatient educationDiabetes mellitusBiostatisticsRandomized controlled trialMultidisciplinary approachHealth careMEDLINEEpidemiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic patient education (TPE) is a structured, person-centered educational process designed to empower individuals living with non-communicable diseases, such as diabetes mellitus. Educational interventions addressing diabetes in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) are isolated , and their effectiveness is not well reported. Therefore, this systematic review evaluates the impact of TPE interventions on diabetes self-management outcomes in the EMR. METHODS: We searched six databases (MEDLINE OVID, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, and ScienceDirect) for relevant articles. Articles were included if they reflected on TPE initiatives addressing diabetes, conducted in the EMR, delivered by healthcare professionals or multidisciplinary healthcare teams, and utilized TPE components and/or constructs. Data extraction included self-management outcomes of diabetes mellitus and the country of intervention. Effect sizes were computed for all outcomes. RESULTS: 24 articles, including TPE constructs (knowledge, skills, and confidence) or components (goal setting, action planning, shared decision-making), were included in the analysis. Most articles were randomized controlled trials (n = 14). Workshops and educational sessions in group settings were the most common modality of TPE interventions (n = 18). Results were reported based on self-management outcomes: [1] self-care [2], anthropometric and lifestyle, and [3] biological outcomes. The combination of knowledge and confidence (n = 8), and goal setting (n = 8) were the most reported combinations of the patient competency profile and TPE components, respectively. Most studies (n = 18) reported on self-care outcomes, such as general or specific diet adherence, blood glucose monitoring, foot care, and medication adherence, with effect sizes ranging from small to large. 16 articles also reported on biological measures (glycemic, lipid profile, and blood pressure measurements), 11 on anthropometric outcomes (body mass index-BMI, weight, and waist circumference), 4 on dietary outcomes, and 4 on physical activity outcomes. Mixed effect sizes were observed for anthropometric and biological outcomes, with most studies revealing small effect sizes for changes in BMI, weight, and blood lipids. In contrast, large and significant effect sizes for waist circumference, HbA1c, and fasting blood glucose were noted. CONCLUSION: Despite varying effect sizes for most outcomes, TPE interventions in the EMR showed significant improvements in several diabetes self-management outcomes, including waist circumference, HbA1c, and fasting blood glucose. TPE components and constructs were more prevalent with significant improvements and considerable effect in self-care and biological outcomes, particularly when the TPE constructs were utilized in combinations of two or more. PROSPERO, registration number CRD42024601438.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.007
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicDiabetes Management and Education→French-language works237,207→