Openly accessible

Self-determination theory interventions versus usual care in people with diabetes: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Mathiesen, Anne Sophie, Rothmann, Mette Jue, Zoffmann, Vibeke, Jakobsen, Janus Christian, Gluud, Christian, Lindschou, Jane, Due-Christensen, Mette, Rasmussen, Bodil, Marqvorsen, Emilie and Thomsen, Thordis 2021, Self-determination theory interventions versus usual care in people with diabetes: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis, Systematic Reviews, vol. 10, pp. 1-13, doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01566-5.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Self-determination theory interventions versus usual care in people with diabetes: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
Author(s) Mathiesen, Anne Sophie
Rothmann, Mette Jue
Zoffmann, Vibeke
Jakobsen, Janus Christian
Gluud, Christian
Lindschou, Jane
Due-Christensen, Mette
Rasmussen, BodilORCID iD for Rasmussen, Bodil orcid.org/0000-0002-6789-8260
Marqvorsen, Emilie
Thomsen, Thordis
Journal name Systematic Reviews
Volume number 10
Article ID 12
Start page 1
End page 13
Total pages 13
Publisher BioMed Central
Place of publication London, Eng.
Publication date 2021-12
ISSN 2046-4053
2046-4053
Keyword(s) Depressive symptoms
Diabetes distress
Glycated haemoglobin
Guided self-determination method
Health education tools
Psychosocial support
Quality of life
Self-determination theory
Type 1 diabetes
Type 2 diabetes
Summary Background


Existing self-management and behavioural interventions for diabetes vary widely in their content, and their sustained long-term effectiveness is uncertain. Autonomy supporting interventions may be a prerequisite to achieve ‘real life’ patient engagement and more long-term improvement through shared decision-making and collaborative goal setting. Autonomy supportive interventions aim to promote that the person with diabetes’ motivation is autonomous meaning that the person strives for goals they themselves truly believe in and value. This is the goal of self-determination theory and guided self-determination interventions. Self-determination theory has been reviewed but without assessing both benefits and harms and accounting for the risk of random errors using trial sequential analysis. The guided self-determination has not yet been systematically reviewed. The aim of this protocol is to investigate the benefits and harms of self-determination theory-based interventions versus usual care in adults with diabetes.
Methods/design
We will conduct the systematic review following The Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. This protocol is reported according to the PRISMA checklist. A comprehensive search will be undertaken in the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, PsycINFO, SCI-EXPANDED, CINAHL, SSCI, CPCI-S and CPCI-SSH to identify relevant trials. We will include randomised clinical trials assessing interventions theoretically based on guided self-determination or self-determination theory provided face-to-face or digitally by any healthcare professional in any setting. The primary outcomes will be quality of life, mortality, and serious adverse events. The secondary will be diabetes distress, depressive symptoms and adverse events not considered serious. Exploratory outcomes will be glycated haemoglobin and motivation. Outcomes will be assessed at the end of the intervention and at maximum follow-up. The analyses will be performed using Stata version 16 and trial sequential analysis. Two authors will independently screen, extract data from and perform risk of bias assessment of included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Certainty of the evidence will be assessed by GRADE.
Discussion
Self-determination theory interventions aim to promote a more autonomous patient engagement and are commonly used. It is therefore needed to evaluate the benefit and harms according to existing trials.
Language eng
DOI 10.1186/s13643-020-01566-5
Indigenous content off
Field of Research 11 Medical and Health Sciences
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Free to Read? Yes
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30147226

Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 46 Abstract Views, 2 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Thu, 14 Jan 2021, 13:59:25 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.