↓ Skip to main content

Diabetes self-management education reduces risk of all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Endocrine, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
168 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
254 Mendeley
Title
Diabetes self-management education reduces risk of all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Endocrine, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12020-016-1168-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaoqin He, Jie Li, Bin Wang, Qiuming Yao, Ling Li, Ronghua Song, Xiaohong Shi, Jin-an Zhang

Abstract

Diabetes self-management education is an essential part of diabetes care, but its impact on all-cause mortality risk of type 2 diabetes patients is unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis aiming to elucidate the impact of diabetes self-management education on all-cause mortality risk of type 2 diabetes patients was performed. Randomised controlled trials were identified though literature search in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, conference abstracts, and reference lists. Only randomised controlled trials comparing diabetes self-management education with usual care in type 2 diabetes patients and reporting outcomes after a follow-up of at least 12 months were considered eligible. Risk ratios with 95 %CIs were pooled. This study was registered at PROSPERO with the number of CRD42016043911. 42 randomised controlled trials containing 13,017 participants were included. The mean time of follow-up was 1.5 years. There was no heterogeneity among those included studies (I (2) = 0 %). Mortality occurred in 159 participants (2.3 %) in the diabetes self-management education group and in 187 (3.1 %) in the usual care group, and diabetes self-management education significantly reduced risk of all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes patients (pooled risk ratios : 0.74, 95 %CI 0.60-0.90, P = 0.003; absolute risk difference: -0.8 %, 95 %CI -1.4 to -0.3). Both multidisciplinary team education and nurse-led education could significantly reduce mortality risk in type 2 diabetes patients, and the pooled risk ratios were 0.66 (95 %CI 0.46-0.96, P = 0.02; I (2) = 0 %) and 0.64 (95 % CI 0.47- 0.88, P = 0.005; I (2) = 0 %), respectively. Subgroup analyses of studies with longer duration of follow-up (≥1.5 years) or larger sample size (≥300) also found a significant effect of diabetes self-management education in reducing mortality risk among type 2 diabetes. Significant effect of diabetes self-management education in reducing mortality risk was also found in those patients receiving diabetes self-management education with contact hours more than 10 h (pooled risk ratio: 0.60, 95 %CI 0.44-0.82, P = 0.001; I (2) = 0 %), those receiving repeated diabetes self-management education (pooled RR: 0.71, P = 0.001; I (2) = 0 %), those receiving diabetes self-management education using structured curriculum (pooled risk ratio: 0.72, P = 0.01; I (2) = 0 %) and those receiving diabetes self-management education using in-person communication (pooled risk ratio: 0.75, P = 0.02; I (2) = 0 %). The quality of evidence for the effect of diabetes self-management education in reducing all-cause mortality risk among type 2 diabetes patients was rated as moderate according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method, and the absolute risk reduction of all-cause mortality of type 2 diabetic patients by diabetes self-management education was estimated to be 4 fewer per 1000 person-years (from 1 fewer to 6 fewer). The available evidence suggests that diabetes self-management education can reduce all-cause mortality risk in type 2 diabetes patients. Further clinical trials with longer time of follow-up are needed to validate the finding above.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 254 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 254 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 14%
Student > Bachelor 30 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 7%
Researcher 17 7%
Other 43 17%
Unknown 89 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 53 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 49 19%
Social Sciences 11 4%
Psychology 6 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 2%
Other 33 13%
Unknown 97 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,776,137
of 24,891,087 outputs
Outputs from Endocrine
#84
of 1,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,978
of 316,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Endocrine
#4
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,891,087 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,869 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.