Exploring perspectives of people with type-1 diabetes on goalsetting strategies within self-management education and care

Background. Collaborative goal-setting strategies are widely recommended for diabetes self-management support within healthcare systems. Creating self-management plans that fit with peoples’ own goals and priorities has been linked with better diabetic control. Consequently, goal-setting has become a core component of many diabetes selfmanagement programmes such as the ‘Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (DAFNE) programme’. Within DAFNE, people with Type-1 Diabetes (T1D) develop their own goals along with action-plans to stimulate goal-achievement. While widely implemented, limited research has explored how goal-setting strategies are experienced by people with diabetes.Therefore, this study aims to explore the perspectives of people with T1D on theimplementation and value of goal-setting strategies within DAFNE and follow-up diabetes care. Furthermore, views on barriers and facilitators to goal-attainment are explored.Methods. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 people with T1D who attended a DAFNE-programme. Following a longitudinal qualitative research design, interviews took place 1 week, and 6-8 months after completion of DAFNE. A recurrent cross-sectional approach is applied in which themes will be identified at each time-point using thematic analyses.Expected results. Preliminary identified themes surround the difference in value that participants place on goal-setting strategies, and the lack of support for goal-achievement within diabetes care.Current stage. Data collection complete; data-analysis ongoing.Discussion. Goal-setting strategies are increasingly included in guidelines for diabetes support and have become essential parts of many primary care improvement schemes. Therefore, exploring the perspectives of people with T1D on the value and implementation of goal-setting strategies is vital for their optimal application

Front-Line Physicians' Satisfaction with Information Systems in Hospitals

Day-to-day operations management in hospital units is difficult due to continuously varying situations, several actors involved and a vast number of information systems in use. The aim of this study was to describe front-line physicians' satisfaction with existing information systems needed to support the day-to-day operations management in hospitals. A cross-sectional survey was used and data chosen with stratified random sampling were collected in nine hospitals. Data were analyzed with descriptive and inferential statistical methods. The response rate was 65 % (n = 111). The physicians reported that information systems support their decision making to some extent, but they do not improve access to information nor are they tailored for physicians. The respondents also reported that they need to use several information systems to support decision making and that they would prefer one information system to access important information. Improved information access would better support physicians' decision making and has the potential to improve the quality of decisions and speed up the decision making process.Peer reviewe

Timely and reliable evaluation of the effects of interventions: a framework for adaptive meta-analysis (FAME)

Most systematic reviews are retrospective and use aggregate data AD) from publications, meaning they can be unreliable, lag behind therapeutic developments and fail to influence ongoing or new trials. Commonly, the potential influence of unpublished or ongoing trials is overlooked when interpreting results, or determining the value of updating the meta-analysis or need to collect individual participant data (IPD). Therefore, we developed a Framework for Adaptive Metaanalysis (FAME) to determine prospectively the earliest opportunity for reliable AD meta-analysis. We illustrate FAME using two systematic reviews in men with metastatic (M1) and non-metastatic (M0)hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC)