Appendix D: Gaps in the evidence

Appendix D: Gaps in the evidence

The Programme Development Group (PDG) identified a number of gaps in the evidence related to the programmes under examination, based on an assessment of the evidence and expert comment. These gaps are set out below.

  1. There was not enough evidence to judge the effectiveness of interventions to reduce the risk of – and prevent – pre-diabetes. In particular, there was a lack of evidence on how effective they are with people from black and minority ethnic and lower socioeconomic communities in the UK.

    (Source Reviews 1–3 and 5)

  2. There was limited evidence on how different approaches could be combined. (For example, targeting the population as whole, targeting 'high-risk' populations and other approaches, including 'individual' interventions.)

    (Source Reviews 1–3 and 5)

  3. There was limited evidence on the 'cultural appropriateness' of interventions and how they could be effectively adapted or tailored to prevent pre-diabetes.

    (Source Reviews 1–6; Expert paper 10)

  4. There was limited evidence on how the environment in which people live may affect their risk of developing pre-diabetes.

    (Source Reviews 1 and 2; Expert paper 13)

  5. There was limited evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to develop the awareness, knowledge, understanding and skills of healthcare professionals and others responsible for people at high risk of developing pre-diabetes.

    (Source Review 3)

  6. There was limited evidence on the potentially regressive effects of food taxation on health inequalities.

    (Source Expert paper 15)

The Group made five recommendations for research. These are listed in section 5.

  • National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)