Last updated September 9, 2026
Key finding
Questionnaire response rates were low.
The LADDER feasibility study evaluated one-to-one consultations and group sessions for diabetes management, revealing unclear effectiveness in improving social connectivity and quality of life.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Extended (5–20+ y)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
The LADDER feasibility study evaluated one-to-one consultations and group sessions for diabetes management, revealing unclear effectiveness in improving social connectivity and quality of life.
Understanding how to effectively support individuals with diabetes in improving their social connectivity and quality of life is crucial, as these factors can significantly impact overall health outcomes. The unclear effectiveness of the interventions highlights the need for more robust methods to engage participants and measure outcomes in future studies.
Low questionnaire response rates hindered data collection. Quantitative comparisons between intervention and control groups were not feasible. The study's design may limit generalizability to broader populations.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Mette D, Rhawann EH, Daniel P, et al. Living with and Adapting to DiabetEs pRogramme (LADDER): A Feasibility Study. Frontiers in Clinical Diabetes and Healthcare. 2026;7:1749766. doi:10.3389/fcdhc.2026.1749766
Improvement in social connectivity scores was noted, but response rates were low.
Social functioning domain of health-related quality of life showed unclear effectiveness.
Subjective social status improvement was assessed but lacked quantitative comparisons.
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Group sessions, One-to-one consultations and Change in social functioning domain of health-related quality of life, Improvement in social connectivity scores, Improvement in subjective social status, and 2 more.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Group sessions
Primary outcomes
Evidence topics
Primary intervention
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
Editorial context
See why this paper is useful beyond its individual results.
Evidence network role
This section describes how the study fits into the current evidence network. It does not determine whether an intervention works on its own.
2
Related topics
10
Evidence pairs
136
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Save studies and evidence pages, organize your personal Evidence Tracker, and keep the research you care about in one place.
Primary evidence
Evidence topic
matched_outcome
Related evidence
Evidence topic
Save evidence
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Group sessions → Change in social functioning domain of health-related quality of life
Group sessions → Change in social functioning domain of health-related quality of life
Group sessions → Improvement in social connectivity scores
Group sessions → Improvement in social connectivity scores
Group sessions → Improvement in subjective social status
Group sessions → Improvement in subjective social status
Group sessions → WHOQOL-BREF Social relationship
Group sessions → WHOQOL-BREF Social relationship
One-to-one consultations → Change in social functioning domain of health-related quality of life
One-to-one consultations → Change in social functioning domain of health-related quality of life
One-to-one consultations → Improvement in social connectivity scores
One-to-one consultations → Improvement in social connectivity scores
One-to-one consultations → Improvement in subjective social status
One-to-one consultations → Improvement in subjective social status
One-to-one consultations → WHOQOL-BREF Social relationship
One-to-one consultations → WHOQOL-BREF Social relationship
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on Group sessions and Social burden, Group sessions and Social Support in Diabetes.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Behavioral & Lifestyle
Behavioral & Lifestyle
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies on Group sessions
Contributes to Group sessions evidence base.
All studies measuring Social burden
Measures Social burden as a key outcome.
All studies measuring Social Support in Diabetes
Measures Social Support in Diabetes as a key outcome.
Latest published studies
Published within the last 2 years.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
1 results
1 results
1 results
1 results
1 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Group sessions for change in social functioning domain of health-related quality of life.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Change in social functioning domain of health-related quality of life
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Group sessions for improvement in social connectivity scores.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Improvement in social connectivity scores
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Group sessions for improvement in subjective social status.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Improvement in subjective social status
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Group sessions for social burden.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Social burden
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Next steps
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
Read related research summaries.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Your data is always protected.
New studies added every day.
