↓ Skip to main content

Shared Medical Appointments May Be Effective for Improving Clinical and Behavioral Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes: A Narrative Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in endocrinology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Shared Medical Appointments May Be Effective for Improving Clinical and Behavioral Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes: A Narrative Review
Published in
Frontiers in endocrinology, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fendo.2017.00263
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kirthi Menon, Aya Mousa, Maximilian PJ de Courten, Georgia Soldatos, Garry Egger, Barbora de Courten

Abstract

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a complex chronic disease affecting over 400 million people worldwide. Managing T2DM and its associated complications in individual patient consultations poses substantial challenges to physicians due to limited time and resources and lack of access to multidisciplinary teams. Shared medical appointments (SMAs) are consecutive medical consultations provided by a physician in a group setting, where integrated medical care and patient education are delivered in a single session. SMAs allow physicians to deliver the same level of care to multiple patients at the same time, thereby maximizing available resources. However, the effectiveness and practicality of SMAs in the management of T2DM remains unknown. This narrative review summarizes current and emerging evidence regarding the effectiveness of SMAs in improving clinical outcomes in patients with T2DM, as well as whether SMAs are associated with reduced costs and improved diabetes-related behavioral and lifestyle changes. An extensive literature search was conducted on major electronic databases including PubMed and Google Scholar using keywords, including SMAs, group visits, and T2DM to identify all studies of SMAs in patients with T2DM. Studies in type 1 diabetes or mixed or unspecified populations were excluded, as well as studies where SMAs did not involve a physician since these do not meet the classical definition of a SMA. Nineteen studies were identified and are included in this review. Overall, current evidence suggests that SMAs delivered regularly over time may be effective in improving glycemic outcomes, diabetes knowledge, and some diabetes-related behaviors. However, the main limitation of existing studies was the paucity of comparisons with standard care which limits the ability to draw conclusions regarding whether SMAs are superior to standard care in T2DM management. Moreover, the small number of studies and substantial heterogeneity in study designs, populations, and interventions creates difficulties in establishing the practicality and efficiency of SMAs in the clinical care setting. We conclude that there remains a need for larger studies to identify populations who may or may not benefit from the SMA model of care and to clarify the potential benefits and barriers to implementing SMAs into routine diabetes care.

X Demographics

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 21%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 4 6%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 24 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 28 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 19 December 2018.
All research outputs
#7,402,314
of 25,932,719 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in endocrinology
#2,124
of 13,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,351
of 334,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in endocrinology
#27
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,932,719 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 334,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.