SynthesisAtencion primaria2008
[Out-patient determination of glycosylated haemoglobin in the monitoring and control of diabetes mellitus: systematic review of the literature].
Synthesis in Atencion primaria, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Portable coagulometer devices in the monitoring and control of oral anticoagulation therapy: a systematic review].Atencion primaria · 2011Pooled it
- [Capillary HbA1c determination on type 2 diabetes patients in a primary health centre].Atencion primaria · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare out-patient determination of HbA(1c) with lab figures, by measuring metabolic control, quality of life and hypoglycaemia episodes, in adults with type-1 or -2 diabetes mellitus.
designSystematic review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (1966-August 2006), EMBASE (2000-August 2006), bases held by the Center for Reviews and Dissemination (DARE, INAHTA, NHS-EED), Cochrane Library (number 3, 2006), European Medication Agency, Food and Drug Administration and the European Network of Emerging Technologies. A manual search was made in Point of Care and in the register of trials, (ClinicalTrials.gov).
methodsInclusion criteria were studies with type-1 or -2 diabetics who used portable out-patient devices and with comparison with lab references. Studies of minors, of any other kind of diabetes, of patients without a portable device and where the comparator did not include reference methods were excluded. Those that a priori met the criteria were recovered fully. A quality analysis was run according to the CASPe programme criteria and data were extracted with specific formulae. As meta-analysis was not possible, a qualitative synthesis was made.
resultsTwenty publications were selected. The values of most devices correlated well (R(2)=0.85 and R(2)=0.059; P< .001). Some studies described increase in glycaemia control, with drop in HbA(1c) of 0.1%-1.5% (P< .01); therapy control was more intense (95% CI, 0.95-1.52) and visits to the doctor decreased.
conclusionsOut-patient evaluations are rapid and comfortable, increasing patients' metabolic control. However, they possess certain limitations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.