Comparative Effectiveness of 2 Diabetes Prevention Lifestyle Programs in the Workplace: The City and County of San Francisco Diabetes Prevention Trial
ORIGINAL RESEARCH — Volume 17 — May 28, 2020
PEER REVIEWED
During the enrollment phase, 351 participants were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 193 people were excluded (did not meet inclusion criteria [n = 128], declined to participate [n = 26], did not attend orientation [n = 35], had incomplete consent [n = 4]), and 158 were randomly assigned. Eighty people were assigned to the VLM-DPP, and 78 were assigned to the YMCA-DPP. Of those in the VLM-DPP, 59 received the intervention, and 21 did not because of not completing any intervention session. Of those in the YMCA-DPP, 71 received the intervention, and 7 did not because of not completing any intervention session. In the VLM-DPP, 29 were lost to follow-up because they declined to continue, and in the YMCA-DPP, 13 were lost to follow-up because they declined to continue. Of participants who were analyzed in the VLM-DPP, 51 had measured weight, and 80 had either measured or imputed weight. Of participants who were analyzed in the YMCA-DPP, 65 had measured weight, and 78 had either measured or imputed weight.
Figure.
Random assignment into 1 of 2 diabetes lifestyle management programs in the workplace, the City and County of San Francisco Diabetes Prevention Trial, 2015–2016. Abbreviations: DPP, diabetes prevention program; VLM, virtual lifestyle management.
The opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors’ affiliated institutions.