Process Evaluations of Interventions for the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review

BackgroundGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is characterized by hyperglycemia in pregnancy and typically resolves after birth. Women with GDM have an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) later in life compared to those with normoglycemic pregnancy. W...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Iklil Iman Mohd Sa'id, Natasha Hotung, Madeleine Benton, Iliatha Papachristou Nadal, Anisah Baharom, Matthew Prina, Barakatun Nisak Mohd Yusof, Kimberley Goldsmith, Samantha Birts, Ching Siew Mooi, Angus Forbes, Khalida Ismail, Boon How Chew
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: JMIR Publications 2025-02-01
Series:Interactive Journal of Medical Research
Online Access:https://www.i-jmr.org/2025/1/e51718
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1825208950880993280
author Iklil Iman Mohd Sa'id
Natasha Hotung
Madeleine Benton
Iliatha Papachristou Nadal
Anisah Baharom
Matthew Prina
Barakatun Nisak Mohd Yusof
Kimberley Goldsmith
Samantha Birts
Ching Siew Mooi
Angus Forbes
Khalida Ismail
Boon How Chew
author_facet Iklil Iman Mohd Sa'id
Natasha Hotung
Madeleine Benton
Iliatha Papachristou Nadal
Anisah Baharom
Matthew Prina
Barakatun Nisak Mohd Yusof
Kimberley Goldsmith
Samantha Birts
Ching Siew Mooi
Angus Forbes
Khalida Ismail
Boon How Chew
author_sort Iklil Iman Mohd Sa'id
collection DOAJ
description BackgroundGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is characterized by hyperglycemia in pregnancy and typically resolves after birth. Women with GDM have an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) later in life compared to those with normoglycemic pregnancy. While diabetes prevention interventions (DPIs) have been developed to delay or prevent the onset of T2DM, few studies have provided process evaluation (PE) data to assess the mechanisms of impact, quality of implementation, or contextual factors that may influence the effectiveness of the intervention. ObjectiveThis study aims to identify and evaluate PE data and how these link to outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of T2DM prevention interventions for women with GDM. MethodsA systematic review was conducted to identify studies published from 2005 to 2020 aiming to capture the most recent DPIs. Five electronic bibliographic databases (Cochrane Library, Cochrane Collaboration Registry of Controlled Trials, Embase, PubMed, and MEDLINE) were searched to identify relevant studies. Inclusion criteria were published (peer-reviewed) RCTs of DPIs in women with a current diagnosis or history of GDM. Exclusion criteria were studies not published in English; studies where the target population was women who had a family history of T2D or women who were menopausal or postmenopausal; and gray literature, including abstracts in conference proceedings. The Medical Research Council’s PE framework of complex interventions was used to identify key PE components. The Mixed Method Appraisal Tool was used to assess the quality of included studies. ResultsA total of 24 studies were included; however, only 5 studies explicitly reported a PE theoretical framework. The studies involved 3 methods of intervention delivery, including in person (n=7), digital (n=7), and hybrid (n=9). Two of the studies conducted pilot RCTs assessing the feasibility and acceptability of their interventions, including recruitment, participation, retention, program implementation, adherence, and satisfaction, and 1 study assessed the efficacy of a questionnaire to promote food and vegetable intake. While most studies linked PE data with study outcomes, it was unclear which of the reported PE components were specifically linked to the positive outcomes. ConclusionsWhile the Medical Research Council’s framework is a valuable source for conducting systematic reviews on PEs, it has been criticized for lacking practical advice on how to conduct them. The lack of information on PE frameworks in our review also made it difficult to categorize individual PE components against the framework. We need clearer guidance and robust frameworks for conducting PEs for the development and reporting of DPIs for women with GDM. Trial RegistrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020208212; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=208212 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211034010
format Article
id doaj-art-8b8b30b3198e4234a05d71ed80960402
institution Kabale University
issn 1929-073X
language English
publishDate 2025-02-01
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format Article
series Interactive Journal of Medical Research
spelling doaj-art-8b8b30b3198e4234a05d71ed809604022025-02-06T16:30:35ZengJMIR PublicationsInteractive Journal of Medical Research1929-073X2025-02-0114e5171810.2196/51718Process Evaluations of Interventions for the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic ReviewIklil Iman Mohd Sa'idhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-7330-9397Natasha Hotunghttps://orcid.org/0009-0002-5261-8809Madeleine Bentonhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-0779-6334Iliatha Papachristou Nadalhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-2991-2578Anisah Baharomhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2590-4869Matthew Prinahttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-6698-3263Barakatun Nisak Mohd Yusofhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0403-5895Kimberley Goldsmithhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-0620-7868Samantha Birtshttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-8481-7939Ching Siew Mooihttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-4425-7989Angus Forbeshttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-3331-755XKhalida Ismailhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-6084-449XBoon How Chewhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-8627-6248 BackgroundGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is characterized by hyperglycemia in pregnancy and typically resolves after birth. Women with GDM have an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) later in life compared to those with normoglycemic pregnancy. While diabetes prevention interventions (DPIs) have been developed to delay or prevent the onset of T2DM, few studies have provided process evaluation (PE) data to assess the mechanisms of impact, quality of implementation, or contextual factors that may influence the effectiveness of the intervention. ObjectiveThis study aims to identify and evaluate PE data and how these link to outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of T2DM prevention interventions for women with GDM. MethodsA systematic review was conducted to identify studies published from 2005 to 2020 aiming to capture the most recent DPIs. Five electronic bibliographic databases (Cochrane Library, Cochrane Collaboration Registry of Controlled Trials, Embase, PubMed, and MEDLINE) were searched to identify relevant studies. Inclusion criteria were published (peer-reviewed) RCTs of DPIs in women with a current diagnosis or history of GDM. Exclusion criteria were studies not published in English; studies where the target population was women who had a family history of T2D or women who were menopausal or postmenopausal; and gray literature, including abstracts in conference proceedings. The Medical Research Council’s PE framework of complex interventions was used to identify key PE components. The Mixed Method Appraisal Tool was used to assess the quality of included studies. ResultsA total of 24 studies were included; however, only 5 studies explicitly reported a PE theoretical framework. The studies involved 3 methods of intervention delivery, including in person (n=7), digital (n=7), and hybrid (n=9). Two of the studies conducted pilot RCTs assessing the feasibility and acceptability of their interventions, including recruitment, participation, retention, program implementation, adherence, and satisfaction, and 1 study assessed the efficacy of a questionnaire to promote food and vegetable intake. While most studies linked PE data with study outcomes, it was unclear which of the reported PE components were specifically linked to the positive outcomes. ConclusionsWhile the Medical Research Council’s framework is a valuable source for conducting systematic reviews on PEs, it has been criticized for lacking practical advice on how to conduct them. The lack of information on PE frameworks in our review also made it difficult to categorize individual PE components against the framework. We need clearer guidance and robust frameworks for conducting PEs for the development and reporting of DPIs for women with GDM. Trial RegistrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020208212; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=208212 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211034010https://www.i-jmr.org/2025/1/e51718
spellingShingle Iklil Iman Mohd Sa'id
Natasha Hotung
Madeleine Benton
Iliatha Papachristou Nadal
Anisah Baharom
Matthew Prina
Barakatun Nisak Mohd Yusof
Kimberley Goldsmith
Samantha Birts
Ching Siew Mooi
Angus Forbes
Khalida Ismail
Boon How Chew
Process Evaluations of Interventions for the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review
Interactive Journal of Medical Research
title Process Evaluations of Interventions for the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review
title_full Process Evaluations of Interventions for the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review
title_fullStr Process Evaluations of Interventions for the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Process Evaluations of Interventions for the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review
title_short Process Evaluations of Interventions for the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review
title_sort process evaluations of interventions for the prevention of type 2 diabetes in women with gestational diabetes mellitus systematic review
url https://www.i-jmr.org/2025/1/e51718
work_keys_str_mv AT iklilimanmohdsaid processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT natashahotung processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT madeleinebenton processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT iliathapapachristounadal processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT anisahbaharom processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT matthewprina processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT barakatunnisakmohdyusof processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT kimberleygoldsmith processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT samanthabirts processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT chingsiewmooi processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT angusforbes processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT khalidaismail processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview
AT boonhowchew processevaluationsofinterventionsforthepreventionoftype2diabetesinwomenwithgestationaldiabetesmellitussystematicreview