Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of psychological interventions to improve Glycaemic control in children and adults with type 1 diabetes
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Aim We conducted a systematic review aggregate and network meta‐analysis of psychological interventions for people with type 1 diabetes to assess their effectiveness in improving glycaemic levels. Methods We searched the following databases from 1 January 2003 to 1 July 2018: MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Trials, Web of Science, clinicaltrials.gov , Dissertation Abstract International. We included randomized controlled trials (RCT) of psychological interventions for children and adults with type 1 diabetes reported in any language. We extracted data on publications, participant characteristics at baseline, intervention and control group, and data for the primary outcome, change in glycaemic control [HbA1c (mmol/mol/%)]. Study authors were contacted for missing data. The review was registered with international prospective register of systematic reviews registration (PROSPERO) CRD42016033619. Results Twenty‐four adult RCTs and 23 of children with type 1 diabetes were included in the systematic review. In aggregate meta‐analysis there was no overall effect of psychological intervention compared with control on HbA1c [adults, nine RCTs, n = 1102, pooled mean difference −0.12, 95% confidence intervals (CI) −0.27 to 0.03, I2 = 29.0%, P = 0.19; children, 20 RCTs, n = 2567, −0.09, 95% CI −0.22 to 0.04, I2=54.0% P=0.002]. Network meta‐analysis suggested that probability and rank‐ordering of effectiveness is highest for attention control groups (b = −0.47, 95% CI −0.80 to −0.12) followed by cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) (−0.26, 95% CI −0.45 to −0.06) compared with usual care for adults. Conclusions Overall psychological interventions for children and adults with type 1 diabetes do not improve glycaemic control. For adults, CBT‐based interventions have the potential to be effective.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The results regarding HbA1c correspond to those of a meta-analysis involving overall psychological interventions in type 1 diabetes and a meta-analysis of CBT interventions for diabetes related distress in type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
“The results regarding HbA1c correspond to those of a meta-analysis involving overall psychological interventions in type 1 diabetes57 and a meta-analysis of CBT interventions for diabetes related distress in type 1 and type 2 diabetes.58”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 47
- Authors
- Winkley, K., Upsher, R., Stahl, D., Pollard, D., Brennan, A., Heller, S., & Ismail, K.
- Affiliations
- Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care London UK
- Department of Psychological Medicine Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience London UK
- King's College London (GB)
- University of Sheffield (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Winkley, K.
- Venue
- Diabetic Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-03-10
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 735-746
- ISSN
- 0742-3071 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5491
- PMC
- PMC7217004
- OpenAlex
- W3004722801
- Cited by
- 47
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 1.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Diabetic Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Health Technology Assessment Programme (12/213/10)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Diabetes and associated disorders
- Keywords
- type 1 diabetes, psychological intervention, glycemic control, HbA1c, cognitive behavioral therapy, children, adults, attentional control, diabetes self-management
- MeSH terms
- Glycemic Control, Adult, Child, Counseling, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Family Therapy, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review