SpringerLink
Log in

Knowledge gaps in diabetes research: an evidence map** of the literature

  • Review article
  • Published:
Journal of Diabetes & Metabolic Disorders Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Map** the available evidence can be used to inform current diabetes research, identify relevant gaps, and prioritize future research. In this regard, we mapped diabetes research performed in Iran.

Method

We searched the Scopus and PubMed databases from 01/01/2015 till 01/01/2020 using keywords such as diabetes and Iran. The included articles were classified according to their document types, level of evidence, and subject areas.

Results

The majority of the included articles (53%) were related to diabetes types, followed by complications (28%). Most of the documents were original articles (82%), and reviews were 18% of the publications. Systematic reviews constitute only 6% of the total documents. Observational studies were the most common types of study designs (26%), followed by clinical trials (20%). Moreover, topics on control and management of diabetes were the most prevalent subject areas (58%), and fewer studies were on preventive strategies (6%). In diabetes management studies, less attention has been paid to evaluate psychological (10%), educational (9%), and physical activity-related (7%) interventions. There was a shortage of secondary studies related to physical activity, psychology, diagnostic, and screening-related studies.

Conclusion

To fill diabetes research gaps, more investment in cost-effectiveness interventions, such as preventive strategies and behavioral self-management programs, need. Moreover, we need to pay more attention on applied sciences and real world evidence to bridge translational gaps from bench to bedside. In this regard, further data synthesis can be helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the available studies and avoiding unnecessary investigations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].

References

  1. Federation, I.D.J.D.I., IDF diabetes atlas ninth. 2019.

  2. Federation I. International diabetes Federation. In: IDF Diabetes Atlas. 8th ed. Brussels: International Diabetes Federation; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Esteghamati A, et al. Diabetes in Iran: prospective analysis from first Nationwide diabetes report of National Program for prevention and control of diabetes (NPPCD-2016). Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):13461.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Brownlee M. The pathobiology of diabetic complications. A unifying mechanism. Diabetes. 2005;54(6):1615–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Glasgow RE. Translating research to practice. Lessons learned, areas for improvement, and future directions. Diabetes Care. 2003;26(8):2451–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pound P, Ritskes-Hoitinga M. Can prospective systematic reviews of animal studies improve clinical translation? J Transl Med. 2020;18(1):15.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Geiss L, et al. A national progress report on diabetes: successes and challenges. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005;7(1):198–203.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fonseca VA, et al. The American Diabetes Association diabetes research perspective. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(6):1380–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Chalmers I, et al. How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set. Lancet. 2014;383(9912):156–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bloomfield GS, et al. Disparities in cardiovascular research output and citations from 52 African countries: a time-trend, bibliometric analysis (1999-2008). J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4(4):e001606.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Grant MJ, Booth AJHI, Journal L. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Inf Libr J. 2009;26(2):91–108.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bragge P, et al. The global evidence map** initiative: sco** research in broad topic areas. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11:92. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet. 2009;374(9683):86–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. O’Leary BC, et al. Evidence maps and evidence gaps: evidence review map** as a method for collating and appraising evidence reviews to inform research and policy. Environ Evid. 2017;6(1):19.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sun Y, et al. Evidence map** of recommendations on diagnosis and therapeutic strategies for diabetes foot: an international review of 22 guidelines. Metabolism. 2019;100:153956.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sun Y, et al. An evidence map of clinical practice guideline recommendations and quality on diabetic retinopathy. Eye (Lond). 2020;34(11):1989–2000.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Correia JC, et al. Interventions targeting hypertension and diabetes mellitus at community and primary healthcare level in low- and middle-income countries:a sco** review. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1542.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Kullgren JT, et al. A sco** review of behavioral economic interventions for prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Curr Diab Rep. 2017;17(9):73.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Rosputni C, et al. Diabetes prevention programs in rural North America: a systematic sco** review. Curr Diab Rep. 2019;19(7):43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Khosravi B, et al. Health care expenditure in the Islamic Republic of Iran versus other high spending countries. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2017;31:71.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Hetrick SE, et al. Evidence map**: illustrating an emerging methodology to improve evidence-based practice in youth mental health. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010;16(6):1025–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Katz DL, et al. The evidence base for complementary and alternative medicine: methods of evidence map** with application to CAM. Altern Ther Health Med. 2003;9(4):22–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Arksey H, O'Malley L. Sco** studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Süt N. Study designs in medicine. Balkan Med J. 2014;31(4):273–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Moher D, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2009;339:b2535.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Saran A, White H. Evidence and gap maps: a comparison of different approaches. Campbell Syst Rev. 2018;14(1):1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Miake-Lye IM, et al. What is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and products. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):28.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Afable A, Karingula NS. Evidence based review of type 2 diabetes prevention and management in low and middle income countries. World J Diabetes. 2016;7(10):209–29.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Timpel P, et al. Map** the evidence on the effectiveness of telemedicine interventions in diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and Meta-analyses. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(3):e16791.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Wang DD, et al. Creating a literature database of low-calorie sweeteners and health studies: evidence map**. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16(1):1.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Singh K, et al. An evidence map of systematic reviews to inform interventions in prediabetes. Can J Diabetes. 2012;36(5):281–91.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Patsopoulos NA, Analatos AA, Ioannidis JPJJ. Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. Jama. 2005;293(19):2362–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Schlosser RW. The role of systematic reviews in evidence-based practice, research, and development. Focus. 2006;15:1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Bärnighausen T, et al. Quasi-experimental study designs series—paper 4: uses and value. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;89:21–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kaptchuk TJ. The double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial: gold standard or golden calf? J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54(6):541–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Pandis N. The evidence pyramid and introduction to randomized controlled trials. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2011;140(3):446–7.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Frieden TR. Evidence for health decision making — beyond randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(5):465–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ali Z, Chandrasekera PC, Pippin JJ. Animal research for type 2 diabetes mellitus, its limited translation for clinical benefit, and the way forward. Altern Lab Anim. 2018;46(1):13–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Chatzigeorgiou A, et al. The use of animal models in the study of diabetes mellitus. In vivo. 2009;23(2):245–58.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Knowler WC, et al. Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(6):393–403.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kirkman MS, et al. Impact of a program to improve adherence to diabetes guidelines by primary care physicians. Diabetes Care. 2002;25(11):1946–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Cooksey D, A review of UK health research funding. 2006: The Stationery Office.

  43. Zaccardi F, Davies M, Khunti K. The present and future scope of real-world evidence research in diabetes: what questions can and cannot be answered and what might be possible in the future? Diabetes Obes Metab. 2020;22:21–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Evans K. Real world evidence: can we really expect it to have much influence? Drugs Real World Outcomes. 2019;6(2):43–5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Curtis HJ, et al. Time trends and geographical variation in prescribing of drugs for diabetes in England from 1998 to 2017. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018;20(9):2159–68.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Ueda P, et al. Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and risk of serious adverse events: nationwide register based cohort study. Bmj. 2018;363:k4365.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Nasli-Esfahani E, et al. Iran diabetes research roadmap (IDRR) study: a preliminary study on diabetes research in the world and Iran. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2017;16:9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Klaprat N, MacIntosh A, McGavock JM. Gaps in knowledge and the need for patient-Partners in Research Related to physical activity and type 1 diabetes: a narrative review. Front Endocrinol. 2019;10(42).

  49. Codella R, Terruzzi I, Luzi L. Why should people with type 1 diabetes exercise regularly? Acta Diabetol. 2017;54(7):615–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. American Diabetes Association. 8 obesity Management for the Treatment of type 2 diabetes: standards of medical Care in Diabetes—2020. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(Supplement 1):S89–97.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Colberg SR, et al. Physical activity/exercise and diabetes: a position statement of the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care. 2016;39(11):2065–79.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Chatterjee S, Davies MJ. Current management of diabetes mellitus and future directions in care. Postgrad Med J. 2015;91(1081):612–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ali MK, Echouffo-Tcheugui J, Williamson DF. How effective were lifestyle interventions in real-world settings that were modeled on the diabetes prevention program? Health Aff (Millwood). 2012;31(1):67–75.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Johnson M, et al. Can diabetes prevention programmes be translated effectively into real-world settings and still deliver improved outcomes? A synthesis of evidence. Diabet Med. 2013;30(1):3–15.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Impact of intensive lifestyle and metformin therapy on cardiovascular disease risk factors in the diabetes prevention program. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(4):888–94.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Kolb H, Martin S. Environmental/lifestyle factors in the pathogenesis and prevention of type 2 diabetes. BMC Med. 2017;15(1):131.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Florez H, et al. Impact of lifestyle intervention and metformin on health-related quality of life: the diabetes prevention program randomized trial. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27(12):1594–601.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Zhuo X, et al. A nationwide community-based lifestyle program could delay or prevent type 2 diabetes cases and save $5.7 billion in 25 years. Health Aff. 2012;31(1):50–60.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Felton A-M and Hall M, Diabetes in Europe policy puzzle: the state we are in. 2015, Taylor & Francis.

Download references

Funding

This research received a grant (grant number:1398-1-97-974) from Endocrinology and Metabolism of Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Diabetes Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, PO Box: 1411413137, Tehran, Iran

    Shahnaz Esmaeili, Fatemeh Bandarian, Ali Tootee & Ensieh Nasli-Esfahani

  2. Personalized medicine research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Fatemeh Gharishvandi

  3. Metabolomics and Genomics Research Center. Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Farideh Razi

  4. Elderly health research Center. Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Shaghayegh Hosseinkhani

  5. Biosensor Research Center. Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Nazli Namazi

  6. Immunology, Asthma and Allergy Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Behnaz Esmaeili

  7. Metabolic Disorders Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Mahnaz Sanjari

  8. Cell therapy and regenerative medicine research center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Saeedeh Saeedi

  9. Evidence Based Medicine Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Camelia Rambod & Maryam Aalaa

  10. Osteoporosis Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Noushin Fahimfar

  11. Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Center, Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinical, Sciences Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, PO Box: 1411413137, Tehran, Iran

    Bagher Larijani

Authors
  1. Shahnaz Esmaeili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fatemeh Bandarian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fatemeh Gharishvandi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Farideh Razi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Shaghayegh Hosseinkhani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nazli Namazi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Behnaz Esmaeili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Mahnaz Sanjari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Ali Tootee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Saeedeh Saeedi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Camelia Rambod
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Maryam Aalaa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Noushin Fahimfar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Bagher Larijani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Ensieh Nasli-Esfahani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SH.E: the data collection and extraction, thematic synthesis of information, the data classification, write the manuscript draft, revised it, and approved final manuscript.

F.R, N.N, M.S., M.A, F.B,, A.T, S.S, C.R: the data screening.

F.GH, B.E, SH.H: the data extraction.

N.F, F.B: critically reviewed the manuscript.

B.L: provided the study concept and critically reviewed the manuscript and approved final manuscript.

E.N-E: provided the study concept and critical review of the manuscript and approving final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Bagher Larijani or Ensieh Nasli-Esfahani.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics approval

This study was approved by the ethical committee of Tehran University of Medical Sciences (IR.TUMS.EMRIREC. 1399.004).

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Esmaeili, S., Bandarian, F., Gharishvandi, F. et al. Knowledge gaps in diabetes research: an evidence map** of the literature. J Diabetes Metab Disord 21, 1139–1148 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40200-022-01037-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40200-022-01037-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation