Team Clinic: Virtual Expansion of an Innovative Multi-Disciplinary Care Model for Adolescents and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes

Browse trials for

• Diabetes Mellitus 10,925
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 3,522

Keywords

• Adolescents
• Young Adults
• Group Medical Visits

Diabetes Mellitus

10,925 studies on the registry are indexed under Diabetes Mellitus; 1,319 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 79 is close to the median of 80 across 8,367 interventional studies indexed under Diabetes Mellitus.

Lead sponsor

Children's Hospital Los Angeles is the lead sponsor of 150 studies on the registry; 46 are open to participants now.

Of its 9 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 6 (67%) have results posted.

Study arms

• Other
  Team Clinic Care: No VTC Groups

  Participants attend quarterly visits (1 visit every 3months). Appointments scheduled for Telehealth (TH) (1 in-person visits) as decided by provider/patient and yearly team visit as needed • Providers will utilize a patient centered care approach to conducting appointments

  Other: Team Clinic Care

• Other
  Team Clinic: Virtual Team Clinic Group

  Participants will be invited to participate in online/virtual thematic group sessions led by Team Clinic group facilitators (e.g., RD, SW, RN) aimed at improving glycemic control and treatment adherence, increasing social supports and diabetes care satisfaction, and aid in the transition from caregiver led treatment to self care. o Patients and Family members attend their own online sessions: Energy Training, Proficiency Training, Resilience Training, Balance Training, Miscellaneous sessions - scheduled as needed

  Other: Team Clinic Care

• Other
  Standard Care: No VTC Groups

  Appointments will continue as usually with provider (quarterly visits; 1 visit every 3 months), but will be referred for necessary care per usual methods (e.g., diabetes education or supportive services).

  Other: Standard Care

• Other
  Standard Care: Virtual Team Clinic

  Appointments will continue as usually with provider (quarterly visits; 1 visit every 3 months), but will be referred for necessary care per usual methods (e.g., diabetes education or supportive services). o Patients and Family members attend their own online sessions: Energy Training, Proficiency Training, Resilience Training, Balance Training, Miscellaneous sessions - scheduled as needed

  Other: Standard Care

Interventions

• OtherTeam Clinic Care

  Participants attend quarterly visits (1 visit every 3months). Appointments scheduled for Telehealth (TH) (1 in-person visits) as decided by provider/patient. Selected providers will be trained in the Team Clinic Care protocol for completing medical appointments. Team Clinic Care key components: (1) Shared decision making: Providers, AYA, parent/caregiver will mutually agree on priorities for each medical visit using a shared decision making tool (2) Autonomy supportive care: Providers will be trained in skills building, patient centered key elements, intervention bites, reviewing plans, designed to support AYA autonomy and intrinsic motivation. AYA will also direct extent of eligible family involvement. (3) Goal setting and action planning: Providers will be trained to coach AYA in setting SMART goals, developing action plans, and establishing a plan for follow-up between visits as appropriate. (4) Fidelity Review and process for self-assessment

• OtherStandard Care

  Participants attend quarterly visits (1 visit every 3 months) and see their diabetes care provider. They do not participate in Team Clinic group visits but if they need diabetes education or supportive services they will be referred for necessary care per usual methods.

Primary outcomes

1. Hemoglobin A1C at Baseline

   Lab Results: Electronic Medical Record Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) %

   Time frame: baseline to 12 months

2. Hemoglobin A1C Progression

   HbA1c % At-Home Kit

   Time frame: At baseline (0), 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, 12 months

3. Number of Team Clinic Care cohort participants attending appointments

   Attendance will be recorded for each Team Clinic visit

   Time frame: 12 months

4. Number of Virtual Team Clinic Care cohort participants completing appointments

   Attendance will be recorded for each Virtual Team Clinic Visit

   Time frame: 12 months

5. Number of Team Clinic Care cohort participants completing appointments

   Electronic Medical Record (EMR) Abstraction

   Time frame: 12 months

6. Patient and Provider/Clinic Staff Satisfaction as assessed using the Health Care Climate questionnaire

   Likert scale "Very dissatisfied" is 1, "Dissatisfied" is 2, "Neutral" is 3, "Satisfied" is 4, and "Very Satisfied" is 5. Higher scores indicate more satisfaction, lower scores indicate low satisfaction

   Time frame: 12 months

7. Patient and Provider/Staff Satisfaction

   Cultural Competence Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) - likert Scale; range 0-10, low range indicates low trust and high values indicate trust.

   Time frame: 12 months

8. Patient Experience

   Patient Experience Measures Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) - likert Scale; range 0-10; lower range represents low rating, higher ranges indicate higher rating

   Time frame: 12 months

9. Social Determinants of Health Tool

   Social determinants of health as assessed using a social and environmental factors questionnaire. Polar; Yes or No questions about food insecurity and transportation, "did you worry that your food would run out before you got money to buy more?" "have you or your family ever been unable to go to the doctor because of distance or transportation?"

   Time frame: At 0 (baseline)

10. Number of Standard Clinic cohort participants completing appointments

    Attendance will be recorded for each standard care visit

    Time frame: 12 months

11. Number of Standard Care cohort participants completing appointments

    Electronic Medical Record (EMR) Abstraction

    Time frame: 12 months

Secondary outcomes

1. Number of Team Clinic Care cohort participants with diabetic ketoacidosis

   Diabetic ketoacidosis events both by self report (i.e., did you have any episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis in the past 3 months) and EMR

   Time frame: 12 months

2. Number of Standard Care cohort participants with diabetic ketoacidosis

   Diabetic ketoacidosis events both by self report (i.e., did you have any episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis in the past 3 months) and EMR

   Time frame: 12 months

3. Number of Team Clinic cohort participants with severe hypoglycemia

   Severe hypoglycemia events both by self report (i.e., did you have any episodes of severe hypoglycemia in the past 3 months) and EMR

   Time frame: 12 months

4. Number of Standard Care cohort participants with severe hypoglycemia

   Severe hypoglycemia events both by self report (i.e., did you have any episodes of severe hypoglycemia in the past 3 months) and EMR

   Time frame: 12 months

5. Diabetes Family Conflict Scale

   Diabetes Family Conflict as assessed using the Diabetes Family Conflict Scale (DFCS) for parents and the DFCS for children. Each scale is a 20 item questionnaire using a Likert Scale (1 = Almost Never, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Almost Always). Parent and Child questionnaires are combined with a possible score range from 40 to 120 with higher scores indicating more conflict.

   Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

6. Problem Areas in Diabetes in Caregivers

   Problem Areas in Diabetes as assessed using the Problem Areas in Diabetes - Caregivers (PAID-T). This instrument was designed to assess emotional distress related to caring for a teen with diabetes. It is a 26 item questionnaire using a 6 point Likert Scale format (1-2 = Not a problem, 3-4 = Moderate Problem, 5-6 = Serious Problem). The possible score range is from 26 to 156 with higher scores indicating increased distress.

   Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

7. Problem Areas in Diabetes in Teens

   Problem Areas in Diabetes as assessed using the Problem Areas in Diabetes - Teens (PAID-T). This instrument was designed to assess emotional distress in teens with diabetes. It is a 26 item questionnaire using a 6 point Likert Scale format (1-2 = Not a problem, 3-4 = Moderate Problem, 5-6 = Serious Problem). The possible score range is from 26 to 156 with higher scores indicating increased distress.

   Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

8. Patient - Practitioner Orientation Scale

   Patient - Practitioner Orientation Scale consists of 18 items and 2 subscales. It assesses provider beliefs on patient centeredness. 6-point Likert scale: "Strongly disagree," "Moderately Disagree," "Slightly Disagree," "Slightly Agree," "Moderately Agree," and "Strongly Agree." PPOs score is computed by taking the mean of the 18 items with a minimum score being "1" and maximum being "6." Higher scores present more patient-centered attitudes.

   Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

9. Cost to Instituition

   Cost to Institution as assessed by Patient Health Utilization questionnaire. Polar; Yes or No questions about health service usage in the last three months, "have you had to be admitted to the hospital?" Open-ended question about number of time health services were used, "how many times were you admitted to the hospital for reasons related to diabetes?"

   Time frame: 12 months

10. Cost to Institution - Standard care

    Cost to Institution as assessed using the In Person questionnaire. Polar; Yes or No questionnaire about appointment attendance; "did you attend an in-person, standard care appointment?" "How long was your in-person appointment?" Open-ended questions about time, "how long did it take?"

    Time frame: 12 months

11. Cost to Institution - Team Clinic

    Cost to Institution as assessed using the Online Appointment questionnaire. Polar; Yes or No questions about attendance to in person, Team Clinic care appointment. "Did you attend your in person appointment?" "What types of providers did you see?" Open-ended questions asking about time, "how long did it take?"

    Time frame: 12 months

12. Cost to Institution - Clinic Costs

    Cost to Institution as assessed using the Clinic Cost, Preparation, and Delivery for Providers and Staff questionnaire. Multiple choice questions about person (Doctor, Nurse and Social Worker) and appointment type provided to patient.

    Time frame: 12 months

13. Cost to Institution - Team Costs

    Cost to Institution as assessed using Team Costs of Provider and Staff Training questionnaire. Multiple choice questions used to identify person being trained (e.g. role), "Doctor," "Nurse Practitioner," "Social Worker." Polar; Yes or No questions about provider and staff training for Team Clinic appointment; training on, "roles of the attendees," in Team Clinic. Issues regarding the study and study toolkit.

    Time frame: 12 months

14. Cost to Institution

    Cost to Institution as assessed using the Feasibility and Usability of Toolkit questionnaire. Multiple choice questions used to identify the training session, role, provider, usability of toolkit, and training time. The questionnaire also includes a 6-point Likert scale: "Strongly disagree," "Somewhat Disagree," "Neutral," "Slightly Agree," "Somewhat Agree," and "Strongly Agree."

    Time frame: 12 months

15. Clinical Efficiency

    Assessed using the Clinical Efficiency questionnaire which captures the number of patients seen during a given time period), team members seen, and time patients spent with team members.

    Time frame: 12 months

16. Diabetes Strengths and Resilience Measure for Children

    DSTAR-Child assesses adaptive aspects of adolescents' diabetes management (i.e., "strengths"), and is related to clinical outcomes. It is a 12 item questionnaire using a 5 point Likert Scale format (1= Never, 2= Rarely, 3= Sometimes, 4= Often, 5= Almost Always). Items are scored on a scale of 12-60.

    Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

17. Diabetes Strengths and Resilience Measure for Teens

    DSTAR-Teen assesses adaptive aspects of adolescents' diabetes management (i.e., "strengths"), and is related to clinical outcomes. It is a 12 item questionnaire using a 5 point Likert Scale format (1= Never, 2= Rarely, 3= Sometimes, 4= Often, 5= Almost Always). Items are scored on a scale of 12-60.

    Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

18. PROMIS - Peds Peer Relationships

    Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS )- Peds Peer Relationships. Evaluates and monitors social health. Likert scale used to assess quality of relationships with friends and acquaintances. (1= Never, 2= Almost Never, 3= Sometimes, 4=Often, 5= Almost Always)

    Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

19. PROMIS - Peds Family Relationships

    Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS )- Peds Family Relationships. Evaluates and monitors social health. Likert scale used to assess the subjective (affective, emotional, cognitive) experience of being involved with one's family, feeling like an important person in the family, of feeling accepted and cared for, and feeling that family members, especially parents, can be trusted and depended on for help and understanding. (1= Never, 2= Almost Never, 3= Sometimes, 4=Often, 5= Almost Always)

    Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

20. PROMIS - Emotional Support

    Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS )- Emotional Support (Parents/caregivers). Evaluates and monitors social health. Likert scale assessing perceived feelings of being cared for and valued as a person; having confidant relationships. (1= Never, 2= Almost Never, 3= Sometimes, 4=Often, 5= Almost Always)

    Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

21. PROMIS - Instrumental Support

    Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS )- Instrumental Support (Parents/caregivers). Evaluates and monitors social health. Likert scale assessing Perceived availability of assistance with material, cognitive or task performance. (1= Never, 2= Almost Never, 3= Sometimes, 4=Often, 5= Almost Always)

    Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

22. PROMIS - Informational Support

    Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS )- Informational Support (Parents/caregivers). Evaluates and monitors social health. Likert scale assessing Perceived availability of helpful information or advice.. (1= Never, 2= Almost Never, 3= Sometimes, 4=Often, 5= Almost Always)

    Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

Other outcomes

1. Socio-Demographic History

   Self-reported demographic history (gender, age, race, household income, etc) will be collected.

   Time frame: At 0 (baseline)

2. Medical History

   General health history via self report and EMR

   Time frame: 12 months

3. Diabetes Treatment Regimen - glucometer

   Diabetes treatment regimen assessed through blood glucose checks per day from glucometer downloads will be collected from devices and EMR.

   Time frame: 12 months

4. Diabetes Treatment Regimen - insulin pump

   Diabetes treatment regimen assessed through insulin boluses per day from insulin pump downloads will be collected from devices and EMR.

   Time frame: 12 months

5. Diabetes Treatment Regimen - continuous glucose monitors

   Diabetes treatment regimen assessed through percentage of glucose values low, in target, or high for patients on continuous glucose monitors will be collected from devices and EMR.

   Time frame: 12 months

6. Self-care and mobility as assessed using the EuroQOL five dimensions five levels youth (EQ-5D-Y) questionnaire

   Likert scale; used to measure respondents' endorsement of particular statements. Descriptive system top answer is 1 and last answer is 5. Missing items will be coded as 9. Online software used to score.

   Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

7. The Child Health Utility

   The Child Health Utility 9 dimensions assesses health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Multiple choice used to capture respondents' endorsement of particular statements about experience. "I don't feel \[upset\] today," "I feel a little bit \[upset\] today," "I feel a bit \[upset\] today," "I feel quite \[upset\] today," "I feel very \[upset\] today"

   Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

8. Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8)

   Composed of 8 items to screen, diagnose, and measure the severity of depression.

   Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

9. Shared Medical Appointments - Patient/AYA

   Likert scale; "Strongly disagree" is 1, "disagree" is 2, "neutral" is 3, "agree" is 4, "strongly agree" is 5. Also, includes 3 open-ended questions to measures satisfaction for shared medical appointments.

   Time frame: baseline to 12 months

10. Shared Medical Appointments- Parent/caregiver

    Likert scale;"Strongly disagree" is 1, "disagree" is 2, "neutral" is 3, "agree" is 4, "strongly agree" is 5. Also, includes 3 open-ended questions to measures satisfaction for shared medical appointments.

    Time frame: baseline to 12 months

11. Self Care - Related to Diabetes as assessed by Self-Care questionnaire

    Multiple Choice. Questions about diabetes related self care, "How many hours per day do you currently devote to managing your glucose levels?"

    Time frame: baseline to 12 months

12. Diabetes Family Responsbility Questionnaire - Parent

    Asseses how adolescents with T1D and their families/caregivers share diabetes management and responsibilities. 17 item questionnaire with a 3 factor solution. "Child" is 1, "equal" is 2, and "parent" is 3. A higher score indicates higher levels of caregiver/parent/family responsbility for diabetes management.

    Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

13. Diabetes Family Responsbility Questionnaire - Teen

    Asseses how parents/caregivers of children/teens living with T1D share diabetes management and responsibilities. 17 item questionnaire with a 3 factor solution. "Child" is 1, "equal" is 2, and "parent" is 3. A higher score indicates higher levels of caregiver/parent/family responsbility for diabetes management.

    Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

14. Clinical Variables

    Polar; Yes or No questionnaire. Data extracted from EMR : cholesterol, high density lipoprotein, triglycerides, smoking status, nephropathy, microalbuminaria, macroalbuminaria, end-stage renal disease (death from end-stage renal disease), neuropathy, peripheral arterial disease (low extremity amputation), retinopathy (proliferative retinopathy), macular edema, blindness, angina, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, revascularization (Coronary artery bypass grafting, PCA, and stenting). If answered "yes" for the following: ergosterol, HDL,microalbuminaria, and macroalbuminaria, values will be recorded.

    Time frame: At 0 (baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

15. ADA and CCS standards

    EMR abstraction: Questions assess compliance with ADA and CCS standards when patients have contact with all team members annually. This will be noted with polar questions "Yes" or No." This will be tracked for all patients in the study (e.g., Team Clinic and Standard Clinic).

    Time frame: 12 months

16. Single Item Literacy Scale

    Literacy assessed using the Single Item Literacy Scale. Multiple choice question asking about suppoort needed with reading materials. Options, "never," "rarely," "sometimes," "often," "always"

    Time frame: At 0 (Baseline) and 12 months (after visit 4)

17. Provider Centered Care Observation Form (PCOF)

    Assessing the fidelity of care delivery for ensuring that patients receive full benefits of the Team Clinic intervetion. Domain checklist, "Establishes Rapport," "Maintain Relationship Throughout the Visit," "Collaborative upfront agenda setting," "Maintain Efficiency using transparent thinking and respectful interruption," "Gathering information," "Assessing patient or family perspective on health," "Electronic Medical Record Use," "Physical Exam"

    Time frame: 12 months

18. Facilitator Centered Care Observation Form (PCOF)

    Assessing the fidelity of care delivery for ensuring that patients receive full benefits of the Team Clinic intervetion. Domain checklist, "Establishes Rapport," "Maintains Relationship Trhoughout the Visit," "Session Introduction and Icebreaker," "Session Preparation," "Gathering Information," "Assessing Patient or Family Persepctive on Health/Understanding Context," "Blood Glucose Charting," "Blood Glucose Discussion," "Activity Kit Review"

    Time frame: 12 months

19. Provider/Facilitator Session Feedback Form:

    Assess provider experience during clinic visit and patient-center delivery. Multiple choice, "Establishing Rapport and Maintaining Relationship," "Agenda-setting, Thinking Out-Loud, and Collaboration," "Gathering Information and Understanding Context," "EMR Review and Physical Exam," "Promoting Behavior Change or Self-Management," "Collaborative Planning and Closure," "None of these"

    Time frame: 12 months

Publications

• Miller KM, Foster NC, Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, DuBose SN, DiMeglio LA, Maahs DM, Tamborlane WV; T1D Exchange Clinic Network. Current state of type 1 diabetes treatment in the U.S.: updated data from the T1D Exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care. 2015 Jun;38(6):971-8. doi: 10.2337/dc15-0078. PubMed 25998289 ↗
• Reiss J, Gibson R. Health care transition: destinations unknown. Pediatrics. 2002 Dec;110(6 Pt 2):1307-14. PubMed 12456950 ↗
• Peters A, Laffel L; American Diabetes Association Transitions Working Group. Diabetes care for emerging adults: recommendations for transition from pediatric to adult diabetes care systems: a position statement of the American Diabetes Association, with representation by the American College of Osteopathic Family Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, the American Osteopathic Association, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Children with Diabetes, The Endocrine Society, the International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International, the National Diabetes Education Program, and the Pediatric Endocrine Society (formerly Lawson Wilkins Pediatric Endocrine Society). Diabetes Care. 2011 Nov;34(11):2477-85. doi: 10.2337/dc11-1723. No abstract available. PubMed 22025785 ↗
• Rosen DS, Blum RW, Britto M, Sawyer SM, Siegel DM; Society for Adolescent Medicine. Transition to adult health care for adolescents and young adults with chronic conditions: position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. J Adolesc Health. 2003 Oct;33(4):309-11. doi: 10.1016/s1054-139x(03)00208-8. No abstract available. PubMed 14519573 ↗
• Bryden KS, Dunger DB, Mayou RA, Peveler RC, Neil HA. Poor prognosis of young adults with type 1 diabetes: a longitudinal study. Diabetes Care. 2003 Apr;26(4):1052-7. doi: 10.2337/diacare.26.4.1052. PubMed 12663572 ↗
• Sanchez I. Implementation of a diabetes self-management education program in primary care for adults using shared medical appointments. Diabetes Educ. 2011 May-Jun;37(3):381-91. doi: 10.1177/0145721711401667. Epub 2011 Mar 31. PubMed 21454887 ↗
• Rising SS. Centering pregnancy. An interdisciplinary model of empowerment. J Nurse Midwifery. 1998 Jan-Feb;43(1):46-54. doi: 10.1016/s0091-2182(97)00117-1. PubMed 9489291 ↗
• Noffsinger E. Enhance satisfaction with drop-in group visits. . Hippocrates. 2001;15(2):30-36.
• Noffsinger EB. Running Group Visits in Your Practice. New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media; 2009.
• Floyd BD, Block JM, Buckingham BB, Ly T, Foster N, Wright R, Mueller CL, Hood KK, Shah AC. Stabilization of glycemic control and improved quality of life using a shared medical appointment model in adolescents with type 1 diabetes in suboptimal control. Pediatr Diabetes. 2017 May;18(3):204-212. doi: 10.1111/pedi.12373. Epub 2016 Feb 26. PubMed 26919322 ↗
• Raymond JK, Shea JJ, Berget C, Cain C, Fay-Itzkowitz E, Gilmer L, Hoops S, Owen D, Shepard D, Spiegel G, Klingensmith G. A novel approach to adolescents with type 1 diabetes: the team clinic model. Diabetes Spectr. 2015 Jan;28(1):68-71. doi: 10.2337/diaspect.28.1.68. No abstract available. PubMed 25717281 ↗
• Hood KK, Butler DA, Anderson BJ, Laffel LM. Updated and revised Diabetes Family Conflict Scale. Diabetes Care. 2007 Jul;30(7):1764-9. doi: 10.2337/dc06-2358. Epub 2007 Mar 19. PubMed 17372149 ↗
• Evans M, Davis, L, & Weissberg-Benchell, J. Psychometric properties of the child and parent problem areas in diabetes measures. Paper presented at: Poster presented at the 76th Annual Scientific Sessions of the American Diabetes AssociationJune, 2016; New Orleans, Louisiana.
• Weissberg-Benchell J, Antisdel-Lomaglio J. Diabetes-specific emotional distress among adolescents: feasibility, reliability, and validity of the problem areas in diabetes-teen version. Pediatr Diabetes. 2011 Jun;12(4 Pt 1):341-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-5448.2010.00720.x. Epub 2011 Mar 28. PubMed 21443583 ↗
• McClain MR, Klingensmith GJ, Anderson B, Berget C, Cain C, Shea J, Campbell K, Pyle L, Raymond JK. Team Clinic: Group Approach to Care of Early Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Spectr. 2018 Aug;31(3):273-278. doi: 10.2337/ds17-0063. No abstract available. PubMed 30140144 ↗
• Raymond JK. Models of Care for Adolescents and Young Adults with Type 1 Diabetes in Transition: Shared Medical Appointments and Telemedicine. Pediatr Ann. 2017 May 1;46(5):e193-e197. doi: 10.3928/19382359-20170425-01. PubMed 28489225 ↗
• Rijswijk C, Zantinge E, Seesing F, Raats I, van Dulmen S. Shared and individual medical appointments for children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes; differences in topics discussed? Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Jun;79(3):351-5. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.04.016. Epub 2010 May 2. PubMed 20439147 ↗
• Noordman J, van Dulmen S. Shared Medical Appointments marginally enhance interaction between patients: an observational study on children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Patient Educ Couns. 2013 Sep;92(3):418-25. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.06.008. Epub 2013 Jul 3. PubMed 23830238 ↗
• Mejino A, Noordman J, van Dulmen S. Shared medical appointments for children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: perspectives and experiences of patients, parents, and health care providers. Adolesc Health Med Ther. 2012 Jun 15;3:75-83. doi: 10.2147/AHMT.S32417. eCollection 2012. PubMed 24600288 ↗
• Berget C, Lindwall J, Shea JJ, Klingensmith GJ, Anderson BJ, Cain C, Raymond JK. Team Clinic: An Innovative Group Care Model for Youth with Type 1 Diabetes-Engaging Patients and Meeting Educational Needs. J Nurse Pract. 2017 Jun;13(6):e269-e272. doi: 10.1016/j.nurpra.2017.03.016. Epub 2017 Apr 26. PubMed 28993721 ↗
• Willi SM, Miller KM, DiMeglio LA, Klingensmith GJ, Simmons JH, Tamborlane WV, Nadeau KJ, Kittelsrud JM, Huckfeldt P, Beck RW, Lipman TH; T1D Exchange Clinic Network. Racial-ethnic disparities in management and outcomes among children with type 1 diabetes. Pediatrics. 2015 Mar;135(3):424-34. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-1774. PubMed 25687140 ↗
• Hays RD, Shaul JA, Williams VS, Lubalin JS, Harris-Kojetin LD, Sweeny SF, Cleary PD. Psychometric properties of the CAHPS 1.0 survey measures. Consumer Assessment of Health Plans Study. Med Care. 1999 Mar;37(3 Suppl):MS22-31. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199903001-00003. PubMed 10098556 ↗
• Morris NS, MacLean CD, Chew LD, Littenberg B. The Single Item Literacy Screener: evaluation of a brief instrument to identify limited reading ability. BMC Fam Pract. 2006 Mar 24;7:21. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-7-21. PubMed 16563164 ↗
• Whittemore R, Jaser S, Chao A, Jang M, Grey M. Psychological experience of parents of children with type 1 diabetes: a systematic mixed-studies review. Diabetes Educ. 2012 Jul-Aug;38(4):562-79. doi: 10.1177/0145721712445216. Epub 2012 May 11. PubMed 22581804 ↗
• Continous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) as a CCS/GHPP Program Benefit [press release]. 3/6/2017.
• American Diabetes Association. Erratum. Glycemic Targets. Sec. 6. In Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2017. Diabetes Care 2017;40(Suppl. 1);S48-S56. Diabetes Care. 2017 Jul;40(7):985. doi: 10.2337/dc17-er07a. Epub 2017 May 18. No abstract available. PubMed 28522557 ↗
• Winkley K, Ismail K, Landau S, Eisler I. Psychological interventions to improve glycaemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2006 Jul 8;333(7558):65. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38874.652569.55. Epub 2006 Jun 27. PubMed 16803942 ↗
• Kahana S, Drotar D, Frazier T. Meta-analysis of psychological interventions to promote adherence to treatment in pediatric chronic health conditions. J Pediatr Psychol. 2008 Jul;33(6):590-611. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsm128. Epub 2008 Jan 11. PubMed 18192300 ↗
• Hilliard ME, Harris MA, Weissberg-Benchell J. Diabetes resilience: a model of risk and protection in type 1 diabetes. Curr Diab Rep. 2012 Dec;12(6):739-48. doi: 10.1007/s11892-012-0314-3. PubMed 22956459 ↗
• Rubin RY-H, D; Peyrot, M. Parent-child responsibility and conflict in diabetes care (Abstract) Diabetes Care. 1989;38:28A.
• Palladino DK, Helgeson VS. Friends or foes? A review of peer influence on self-care and glycemic control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. J Pediatr Psychol. 2012 Jun;37(5):591-603. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jss009. Epub 2012 Mar 29. PubMed 22460759 ↗
• Chiang JL, Kirkman MS, Laffel LM, Peters AL; Type 1 Diabetes Sourcebook Authors. Type 1 diabetes through the life span: a position statement of the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care. 2014 Jul;37(7):2034-54. doi: 10.2337/dc14-1140. No abstract available. PubMed 24935775 ↗
• Salvy SJ, Ruelas V, Majidi S, Thomas A, Ashwal G, Reid M, Fox DS, McClain S, Raymond JK. Team clinic: Expansion of a multidisciplinary care model for adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Contemp Clin Trials. 2020 Aug;95:106079. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2020.106079. Epub 2020 Jul 4. PubMed 32634486 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — Development, execution, and data collection for this study is completed with a Principle Investigator at Children's Hospital Los Angeles. With documented permission of the IRB, a PI may develop a de-identified database, codebook, and mechanism by which data can be shared with qualified investigators. Interested Investigators will complete a request form stating the aims of their analyses, analytic plan, available resources for completing a project, timeline, and goals (i.e. manuscripts or grant applications). The PIs and their research team will review requests to determine whether the analyses constitute an innovative exploration of the data, whether the team has resources to complete the request, and whether data will be adequately protected and managed. If issues arise, the PIs and research team will negotiate a fair resolution with interested investigators and NIH staff.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Icf, Csr, Analytic code