NCT06837428|Completed
Peer Comparison-based Risk Communication
PRICOM
Loading search results
PRICOM
Sponsor study identifier
interventional
40
1 country
1
Study Start
August 21, 2023
Actual (reported)Primary Completion
January 22, 2024
Actual (reported)Study Completion
August 29, 2024
Actual (reported)The study objective is to evaluate the feasibility of delivering a risk communication intervention, Peer comparison-based Risk Communication (PRICOM), in the primary care setting for adults with poor T2DM control. Findings from the study will inform further revisions to PRICOM and provide an estimated effect size to estimate the required sample size for a multi-site trial.
Registry-reported information. Elapsed time and enrollment totals alone do not measure study progress or recruitment pace.
August 29, 2024
Actual (reported)Click on a node to explore related trials.
Some registry-reported names shown below are not yet linked in this graph.
Dates and qualifiers reported by the registry. Estimated dates do not confirm that a milestone has occurred.
October 6, 2021
Actual (reported)August 21, 2023
Actual (reported)January 22, 2024
Actual (reported)August 29, 2024
Actual (reported)February 20, 2025
Actual (reported)Risk perception score change
Score change of RPS-DM (Risk Perception Scale - Diabetes Mellitus) questionnaire
6 months
Recruitment rate
% patients eligible to participate who were recruited
6 months
Retention rate
% patient participants who completed the study
6 months
Self-care activity score change
6 months
Medication adherence score change
6 months
HbA1c change
6 months
Perspectives of PRICOM
6 months
The intervention group will attend a risk communication session delivered by the study team and will receive a diabetes pamphlet. This estimated to take 10-15 minutes and will be back-to-back with the patient's routine clinic appointment.
The control group will receive a diabetes pamphlet at their routine clinic appointment but will not attend a PRICOM session.
Based on the Health Belief Model, a risk communication intervention, Peer comparison-based Risk Communication (PRICOM), was developed for primary care physicians to counsel patients with T2DM on their glycaemic control and the complications that could arise, and to recommend ways to improve glycaemic control and prevent complications (or further complications). This will be supported by information from an AI (Artificial Intelligence) based diabetes tool. PRICOM aims to promote health actions in patients with T2DM by increasing their risk perceptions of diabetes complications.
Registry-reported names are shown in full. Names without a link have not yet been matched to a Syfrah profile.
SingHealth Polyclinics - Bedok Polyclinic
Singapore, 469662, Singapore
Png ME, Yoong J, Phan TP, Wee HL. Current and future economic burden of diabetes among working-age adults in Asia: conservative estimates for Singapore from 2010-2050. BMC Public Health. 2016 Feb 16;16:153. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-2827-1.
Roystonn K, Lau JH, AshaRani PV, Siva Kumar FD, Wang P, Sum CF, Lee ES, Chong SA, Subramaniam M. Recognition of diabetes and sociodemographic predictors: results of a cross-sectional nationwide population-based survey in Singapore. BMJ Open. 2022 Mar 1;12(3):e050425. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050425.
Ruiheng Ong
SingHealth Polyclinics
40 participants (actual enrollment reported by the registry).
First Submitted
October 6, 2021
First Posted
February 20, 2025
Study Start
August 21, 2023
Actual (reported)Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Quah JH, Liu YP, Luo N, How CH, Tay EG. Younger adult type 2 diabetic patients have poorer glycaemic control: a cross-sectional study in a primary care setting in Singapore. BMC Endocr Disord. 2013 Jun 3;13:18. doi: 10.1186/1472-6823-13-18.
Lee CS, Tan JHM, Sankari U, Koh YLE, Tan NC. Assessing oral medication adherence among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with polytherapy in a developed Asian community: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2017 Sep 14;7(9):e016317. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016317.
Tan KW, Dickens BSL, Cook AR. Projected burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus-related complications in Singapore until 2050: a Bayesian evidence synthesis. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020 Mar;8(1):e000928. doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2019-000928.
Tan JK, Salim NNM, Lim GH, Chia SY, Thumboo J, Bee YM. Trends in diabetes-related complications in Singapore, 2013-2020: A registry-based study. PLoS One. 2022 Oct 11;17(10):e0275920. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275920. eCollection 2022.
Rothman AJ, Kiviniemi MT. Treating people with information: an analysis and review of approaches to communicating health risk information. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999;(25):44-51. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jncimonographs.a024207.
Roach P, Marrero D. A critical dialogue: communicating with type 2 diabetes patients about cardiovascular risk. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2005;1(4):301-7. doi: 10.2147/vhrm.2005.1.4.301.
Paling J. Strategies to help patients understand risks. BMJ. 2003 Sep 27;327(7417):745-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7417.745.
Naik G, Ahmed H, Edwards AG. Communicating risk to patients and the public. Br J Gen Pract. 2012 Apr;62(597):213-6. doi: 10.3399/bjgp12X636236. No abstract available.
Gao R, Guo H, Liu Y, Pang Y, Zhang X, Lian X, Yu T, Zhu L, Li F. Effects of message framing on self-management behaviour among patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial protocol. BMJ Open. 2022 Jun 28;12(6):e056450. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056450.
Garcia-Retamero R, Okan Y, Cokely ET. Using visual aids to improve communication of risks about health: a review. ScientificWorldJournal. 2012;2012:562637. doi: 10.1100/2012/562637. Epub 2012 May 2.
Trevena L. Assessing, communicating, and managing risk in general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 2014 Apr;64(621):166-7. doi: 10.3399/bjgp14X677725. No abstract available.
Welschen LM, Bot SD, Dekker JM, Timmermans DR, van der Weijden T, Nijpels G. The @RISK Study: Risk communication for patients with type 2 diabetes: design of a randomised controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2010 Aug 5;10:457. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-457.
Welschen LM, Bot SD, Kostense PJ, Dekker JM, Timmermans DR, van der Weijden T, Nijpels G. Effects of cardiovascular disease risk communication for patients with type 2 diabetes on risk perception in a randomized controlled trial: the @RISK study. Diabetes Care. 2012 Dec;35(12):2485-92. doi: 10.2337/dc11-2130. Epub 2012 Aug 24.
Rouyard T, Leal J, Baskerville R, Velardo C, Salvi D, Gray A. Nudging people with Type 2 diabetes towards better self-management through personalized risk communication: A pilot randomized controlled trial in primary care. Endocrinol Diabetes Metab. 2018 Jun 22;1(3):e00022. doi: 10.1002/edm2.22. eCollection 2018 Jul.
Mao L, Lu J, Zhang Q, Zhao Y, Chen G, Sun M, Chang F, Li X. Family-based intervention for patients with type 2 diabetes via WeChat in China: protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2019 Apr 5;19(1):381. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-6702-8.
Feng Y, Zhao Y, Mao L, Gu M, Yuan H, Lu J, Zhang Q, Zhao Q, Li X. The Effectiveness of an eHealth Family-Based Intervention Program in Patients With Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) in the Community Via WeChat: Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2023 Mar 20;11:e40420. doi: 10.2196/40420.
Fang HSA, Tan NC, Tan WY, Oei RW, Lee ML, Hsu W. Patient similarity analytics for explainable clinical risk prediction. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021 Jul 1;21(1):207. doi: 10.1186/s12911-021-01566-y.
Oei RW, Fang HSA, Tan WY, Hsu W, Lee ML, Tan NC. Using Domain Knowledge and Data-Driven Insights for Patient Similarity Analytics. J Pers Med. 2021 Jul 22;11(8):699. doi: 10.3390/jpm11080699.
Stefanut AM, Vintila M. Psychotherapeutic intervention on breast self-examination based on Health Belief Model. Curr Psychol. 2022 Feb 21:1-9. doi: 10.1007/s12144-022-02871-z. Online ahead of print.
Walrave M, Waeterloos C, Ponnet K. Adoption of a Contact Tracing App for Containing COVID-19: A Health Belief Model Approach. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020 Sep 1;6(3):e20572. doi: 10.2196/20572.
Robinson CA. Trust, Health Care Relationships, and Chronic Illness: A Theoretical Coalescence. Glob Qual Nurs Res. 2016 Aug 12;3:2333393616664823. doi: 10.1177/2333393616664823. eCollection 2016 Jan-Dec.
Gorawara-Bhat R, Huang ES, Chin MH. Communicating with older diabetes patients: self-management and social comparison. Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Sep;72(3):411-7. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.05.011. Epub 2008 Jul 18.
Lim DYZ, Chia SY, Abdul Kadir H, Mohamed Salim NN, Bee YM. Establishment of the SingHealth Diabetes Registry. Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Mar 16;13:215-223. doi: 10.2147/CLEP.S300663. eCollection 2021.
Gibbons FX, Buunk BP. Individual differences in social comparison: development of a scale of social comparison orientation. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999 Jan;76(1):129-42. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.76.1.129.
Chan AHY, Horne R, Hankins M, Chisari C. The Medication Adherence Report Scale: A measurement tool for eliciting patients' reports of nonadherence. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2020 Jul;86(7):1281-1288. doi: 10.1111/bcp.14193. Epub 2020 May 18.
Toobert DJ, Hampson SE, Glasgow RE. The summary of diabetes self-care activities measure: results from 7 studies and a revised scale. Diabetes Care. 2000 Jul;23(7):943-50. doi: 10.2337/diacare.23.7.943.
Primary Completion
January 22, 2024
Actual (reported)Study Completion
August 29, 2024
Actual (reported)Last Updated
February 20, 2025
Record last verified: 2024-09
Only IPD used in the results publication
Download the complete ClinicalTrials.gov record imported by Syfrah, including fields not shown in this page. The registry may contain a newer revision.
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov.
JSON downloads include source attribution and retrieval details alongside the unchanged original record or the separately normalized values.
Source retrieved: