Suchergebnisse

Abstract Background One of the consequences of the generational paradigm shift of lifestyle from the traditional African model to a more "western" standard is a replacement of communicable diseases by non-communicable or life style related diseases like diabetes. To address this trend, diabetes education along with continuous assessment of diabetes related knowledge has been advocated. Since most of the Nigerian studies assessing knowledge of diabetes were hospital-based, we decided to evaluate the diabetes related knowledge and its sociodemographic determinants in a general population of diabetics. Methods Diabetics (n = 184) attending the 2012 world diabetes day celebration in a Nigerian community were surveyed using a two part questionnaire. Section A elicited information on their demographics characteristics and participation in update courses, and exercise, while section B assessed knowledge of diabetes using the 14 item Michigan Diabetes Research and Training Centre's Brief Diabetes Knowledge Test. Results We found that Nigerian diabetics had poor knowledge of diabetes, with pervasive fallacies. Majority did not have knowledge of "diabetes diet", "fatty food", "free food", effect of unsweetened fruit juice on blood glucose, treatment of hypoglycaemia, and the average duration glycosylated haemoglobin (haemoglobin A1) test measures blood glucose. Attaining tertiary education, falling under the 51-60 years age group, frequent attendance at seminars/updates and satisfaction with education received, being employed by or formerly working for the government, and claiming an intermediate, or wealthy income status was associated with better knowledge of diabetes. Conclusion Nigerian diabetics' knowledge of diabetes was poor and related to age, level of education, satisfaction with education received, employment status and household wealth.

Background The quality assessment provides information on the overall strength of evidence and methodological quality of a research design, highlighting the level of confidence the reader should place on the findings for decision making. This paper aimed to assess the quality (methodology and quality of reporting) of ageing studies in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Method This paper is the second of a Four-Part Series paper of a previous systematic mapping review of peer-reviewed literature on ageing studies conducted in SSA. We updated the literature search to include additional 32 articles, a total of 544 articles included in this paper. Downs & Black checklist, Case Report guidelines checklist, the 45-items Lundgren et al. checklist, and the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool were used to assess the methodological quality of quantitative, case reports, qualitative, and mixed-method studies. Quality assessment was piloted and conducted in pairs for each study type. Depending on the checklist, each study was classified as excellent, good, fair, or poor. Result Of the 544 articles, we performed the quality assessment of a total of 451 quantitative studies [Randomized control trials (RCTs) and pre-post (n=15), longitudinal (n=122), case-control (n=15) and cross-sectional (n=300); 4 case reports, 74 qualitative and 15 mixed-method studies. Only 20.4% (n=111) articles were of high quality [one RCT, 27 longitudinal, 4 case-control, 48 cross-sectional studies, 19 qualitative, and 12 mixed-method studies]. The remaining 433 were rated as moderate quality (n=292, 53.7%), fair quality (n = 96, 17.7%) and poor quality (n = 45, 8.2%). Most (80%) quantitative articles' sample size is small, resulting in insufficient power to detect a clinically or significant important effect. Three-quarter (75%) of the qualitative studies did not report their research team characteristics and a reflexivity component of the 45-items Lundgren et al. checklist. Mixed-method studies with low quality did not report the qualitative studies properly. Conclusion We conclude that the methodological and quality reporting of published studies on ageing in SSA show variable quality, albeit primarily moderate quality, against high quality. Studies with a large sample size are recommended, and qualitative researchers should provide a section on research team members' characteristics and reflexivity in their paper or as an appendix.