Trial reportDiabetes care2010
Cost-effectiveness of the diabetes care protocol, a multifaceted computerized decision support diabetes management intervention that reduces cardiovascular risk.
Trial report in Diabetes care, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Cost and economic benefit of clinical decision support systems for cardiovascular disease prevention: a community guide systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2017Pooled it
- Risk scoring for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Effectiveness of computerized decision support systems linked to electronic health records: a systematic review and meta-analysis.American journal of public health · 2014Pooled it
- Computerized clinical decision support systems for chronic disease management: a decision-maker-researcher partnership systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2011Pooled it
- Stratified patient-centered care in type 2 diabetes: a cluster-randomized, controlled clinical trial of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.Diabetes care · 2013Trial
- Enhancing Type 2 Diabetes Management Involving Healthcare Professionals in Primary Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Applications of Clinical Decision Support Systems in Diabetes Care: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- The Application of Digital Technologies and Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: An Overview on Nutrition Assessment.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Need for Ethnoracial Equity in Artificial Intelligence for Diabetes Management: Review and Recommendations.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Review
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence for Diabetes Management and Decision Support: Literature Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Review
- Type 2 diabetes: cost-effectiveness of medication adherence and lifestyle interventions.Patient preference and adherence · 2016Article
- Evaluating Diabetes Outcomes and Costs Within an Ambulatory Setting: A Strategic Approach Utilizing a Clinical Decision Support System.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe Diabetes Care Protocol (DCP), a multifaceted computerized decision support diabetes management intervention, reduces cardiovascular risk of type 2 diabetic patients. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of DCP from a Dutch health care perspective. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsA cluster randomized trial provided data of DCP versus usual care. The 1-year follow-up patient data were extrapolated using a modified Dutch microsimulation diabetes model, computing individual lifetime health-related costs, and health effects. Incremental costs and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) were estimated using multivariate generalized estimating equations to correct for practice-level clustering and confounding. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were created. Stroke costs were calculated separately. Subgroup analyses examined patients with and without cardiovascular disease (CVD+ or CVD- patients, respectively).
resultsExcluding stroke, DCP patients lived longer (0.14 life-years, P = NS), experienced more QALYs (0.037, P = NS), and incurred higher total costs (euro 1,415, P = NS), resulting in an ICER of euro 38,243 per QALY gained. The likelihood of cost-effectiveness given a willingness-to-pay threshold of euro 20,000 per QALY gained is 30%. DCP had a more favorable effect on CVD+ patients (ICER = euro 14,814) than for CVD- patients (ICER = euro 121,285). Coronary heart disease costs were reduced (euro-587, P < 0.05).
conclusionsDCP reduces cardiovascular risk, resulting in only a slight improvement in QALYs, lower CVD costs, but higher total costs, with a high cost-effectiveness ratio. Cost-effective care can be achieved by focusing on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients with a history of CVD.
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.