Document Type : Study Protocol


1 Department of Community Nutrition, School of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

2 Health Human Resources Research Center, Department of Health Economics, School of Management and Information Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

3 Department of Nutrition research, National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute, Faculty of Nutrition Sciences and Food Technology, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 Department of Internal Medicine, Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran


Background: Education is the most important principle in managing diseases, especially diabetes. On the other hand, economic burden of diabetes is another important issue. Thus, this study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of group vs. Weblog-Telecommunication (Web-Tel) nutrition education on glycemic, lipids, blood pressure, and anthropometric indices of type-2 diabetic patients.
Methods: This randomized controlled trial study will be conducted in health centers of Bushehr city. One-hundred five patients with type 2 diabetes will randomly be assigned to one of the three groups: group education, Web-Tel education, and the control. The study has two phases. The first phase (or preintervention phase) will last two weeks and the second phase (or intervention phase) 12 weeks. In group education, in addition to the usual cares, the participants will receive group seminars monthly (3 seminars in total), while the Web-Tel group will receive education via website monthly (3 sessions in total) besides the usual cares, and the control group will receive the usual cares. The outcomes include glycemic, lipids, blood pressure, and anthropometric indices. Also, the cost of each arm will be calculated.
Conclusion: The present study will compare the two methods of nutrition education to determine the more cost-effective nutrition education method for patients with diabetes which can help them in self-care and costs reduction.


  1. Javanbakht M, Mashayekhi A, Baradaran HR, Haghdoost A, Afshin A. Projection of Diabetes Population Size and Associated Economic Burden through 2030 in Iran: Evidence from Micro-Simulation Markov Model and Bayesian Meta-Analysis. PLoS One.  2015;10(7):e0132505. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132505.
  2. )NCD-RisC) NRFC. Worldwide trends in diabetes since 1980: a pooled analysis of 751 population-based studies with 4• 4 million participants. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016;387:1513-30. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00618-8.
  3. Waller K, Furber S, Bauman A, Allman-Farinelli M, van den Dolder P, Hayes A, et al. DTEXT - text messaging intervention to improve outcomes of people with type 2 diabetes: protocol for randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1): 262. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-6550-6.
  4. Keshavarz K, Lotfi F, Sanati E, Salesi M, Hashemi-Meshkini A, Jafari M, et al. Linagliptin versus sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Daru. 2017;25(1):23.
  5. Islam SM, Lechner A, Ferrari U, Froeschl G, Alam DS, Holle R, et al. Mobile phone intervention for increasing adherence to treatment for type 2 diabetes in an urban area of Bangladesh: protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:5.
  6. Seuring T, Archangelidi O, Suhrcke M. The Economic Costs of Type 2 Diabetes: A Global Systematic Review. 2015; 33 (8): 811-31. 10.1007 /s40273-015-0268-9
  7. Noshad S, Afarideh M, Heidari B, Mechanick JI, Esteghamati A. Diabetes Care in Iran: Where We Stand and Where We Are Headed. Ann Glob Health. 2015;81(6):839-50.
  8. Eakin EG, Reeves MM, Marshall AL, Dunstan DW, Graves N, Healy GN, et al. Living Well with Diabetes: a randomized controlled trial of a telephone-delivered intervention for maintenance of weight loss, physical activity and glycaemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes. BMC public health. 2010;10:452.
  9. Yang YS, Wu YC, Lu YL, Kornelius E, Lin YT, Chen YJ, et al. Adherence to self-care behavior and glycemic effects using structured education. J Diabetes Investig. 2015;6(6):662-9.
  10. Reale R, Tumminia A, Romeo L, La Spina N, Baratta R, Padova G, et al. Short-term efficacy of high intensity group and individual education in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized single-center trial. J Endocrinol Invest. 2019;42(4):403-9.
  11. Trento M, Passera P, Borgo E, Tomalino M, Bajardi M, Cavallo F, et al. A 5-year randomized controlled study of learning, problem solving ability, and quality of life modifications in people with type 2 diabetes managed by group care. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(3):670-5.
  12. Chung LM, Law QP, Fong SS, Chung JW, Yuen PP. A cost-effectiveness analysis of teledietetics in short-, intermediate-, and long-term weight reduction. J Telemed Telecare. 2015;21(5):268-75..
  13. Franz MJ, Splett PL, Monk A, Barry B, McClain K, Weaver T, et al. Cost-effectiveness of medical nutrition therapy provided by dietitians for persons with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Am Diet Assoc. 1995;95(9):1018-24.
  14. Mash R, Kroukamp R, Gaziano T, Levitt N. Cost-effectiveness of a diabetes group education program delivered by health promoters with a guiding style in underserved communities in Cape Town, South Africa. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98(5):622-6.
  15. Prezio EA, Pagan JA, Shuval K, Culica D. The Community Diabetes Education (CoDE) program: cost-effectiveness and health outcomes. Am J Prev Med. 2014;47(6):771-9.
  16. Li J, Parrott S, Sweeting M, Farmer A, Ross J, Dack C, et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Facilitated Access to a Self-Management Website, Compared to Usual Care, for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes (HeLP-Diabetes): Randomized Controlled Trial. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(6):e201. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9256.
  17. Kim CJ, Kang DH. Utility of a Web-based Intervention for Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes: The Impact on Physical Activity Levels and Glycemic Control. Computers, Informatics, Nursing. 2006; 24 (6):337–345.
  18. Kennedy G, Ballard T, Dop MC. Guidelines for measuring household and individual dietary diversity. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2011.
  19. Gift TL, Walsh C, Haddix A, Irwin KL. A cost-effectiveness evaluation of testing and treatment of chlamydia trachomatis infection among asymptomatic women infected with Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Sex Transm Dis.2002;29(9):542-551.
  20. Zhou F, Shefer A, Wenger J, Messonnier M, Wang LY, Lopez A, et al. Economic evaluation of the routine childhood immunization program in the United States, 2009. 2014;133(4):577-585. DOI:
  21. Gaziano T. Cardiovascular disease in the developing world and its cost-effective management. Heart Disease in Africa 2005; 112: 3547–53. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.591792.
  22. Sun Y, You W, Almeida F, Estabrooks P, Davy B. The effectiveness and cost of lifestyle interventions including nutrition education for diabetes prevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2017; 117(3):404-21.
  23. Ali MK, Echouffo-Tcheugui JB, Williamson DF. How effective were lifestyle interventions in real-world settings that were modeled on the Diabetes Prevention Program? Health Aff. 2012; 31(1): 67-75. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1009.
  24. Li R, Qu S, Zhang P, Chattopadhyay S, Gregg EW, Albright A, et al. Economic evaluation of combined diet and physical activity promotion programs to prevent type 2 diabetes among persons at increased risk: a systematic review for the Community Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2015; 163(6): 452-60. DOI: 7326/M15-0469
  25. Schellenberg ES, Dryden DM, Vandermeer B, Ha C, Korownyk C. Lifestyle interventions for patients with and at risk for type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2013; 159(8): 543-51. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-159-8-201310150-00007.
  26. Balk EM, Earley A, Raman G, Avendano EA, Pittas AG, Remington PL. Combined diet, and physical activity promotion programs to prevent type 2 diabetes among persons at increased risk: a systematic review for the Community Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2015; 163(6): 437-51. DOI: 7326/M15-0452