| Title |
Effect of peer support interventions on cardiovascular disease risk factors in adults with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-018-5326-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sonal J. Patil, Todd Ruppar, Richelle J. Koopman, Erik J. Lindbloom, Susan G. Elliott, David R. Mehr, Vicki S. Conn |
| Abstract |
Peer support by persons affected with diabetes improves peer supporter's diabetes self-management skills. Peer support interventions by individuals who have diabetes or are affected by diabetes have been shown to improve glycemic control; however, its effects on other cardiovascular disease risk factors in adults with diabetes are unknown. We aimed to estimate the effect of peer support interventions on cardiovascular disease risk factors other than glycemic control in adults with diabetes. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing peer support interventions to a control condition in adults affected by diabetes that measured any cardiovascular disease risk factors [Body Mass Index, smoking, diet, physical activity, cholesterol level, glucose control and blood pressure]. Quality was assessed by Cochrane's risk of bias tool. We calculated standardized mean difference effect sizes using random effects models. We retrieved 438 citations from multiple databases including OVID MEDLINE, Cochrane database and Scopus, and author searches. Of 233 abstracts reviewed, 16 articles met inclusion criteria. A random effects model in a total of 3243 participants showed a positive effect of peer support interventions on systolic BP with a pooled effect size of 2.07 mmHg (CI 0.35 mmHg to 3.79 mmHg, p = 0.02); baseline pooled systolic blood pressure was 137 mmHg. There was a non-significant effect of peer support interventions on diastolic blood pressure, cholesterol, body mass index, diet and physical activity. Cardiovascular disease risk factors other than glycemic control outcomes were secondary outcomes in most studies and baseline values were normal or mildly elevated. Only one study reported smoking outcomes. We found a small (2 mmHg) positive effect of peer support interventions on systolic blood pressure in adults with diabetes whose baseline blood pressure was on average minimally elevated. Additional studies need to be conducted to further understand the effect of peer support interventions on high-risk cardiovascular disease risk factors in adults with diabetes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 125 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 12% |
| Researcher | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Unknown | 51 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 10% |
| Psychology | 4 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Unknown | 54 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 01 January 2019.
All research outputs
#2,721,154
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,119
of 14,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,475
of 331,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#104
of 313 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,999 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 331,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 313 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.