ArticleMedical care2010
Who can respond to treatment? Identifying patient characteristics related to heterogeneity of treatment effects.
Article in Medical care, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- How Are Information and Communication Technologies Supporting Routine Outcome Monitoring and Measurement-Based Care in Psychotherapy? A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- Achieving HbA1c targets in clinical trials and in the real world: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2014Pooled it
- Do pre-existing diabetes social support or depressive symptoms influence the effectiveness of a diabetes management intervention?Patient education and counseling · 2015Trial
- Heterogeneity of treatment effects in transcranial direct current stimulation for knee osteoarthritis pain and symptoms.Pain reports · 2026Article
- Neural and psychophysical predictors of treatment response to transcranial direct current stimulation and mindfulness-based meditation for knee osteoarthritis pain.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Targeting Central Sensitization for Pain Management in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Narrative Review of Mechanisms and Clinical Applications of Neuromodulation.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- A structural causal model for robot-assisted upper-limb neurorehabilitation.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Article
- Patient-reported Outcomes After External Beam Radiotherapy With Low Dose Rate Brachytherapy Boost vs Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Five-year Results From a Prospective Comparative Effectiveness Study.The Journal of urology · 2022Article
- The participatory development of a national core set of person-centred diabetes outcome constructs for use in routine diabetes care across healthcare sectors.Research involvement and engagement · 2021Article
- A Pharmacist and Health Coach-Delivered Mobile Health Intervention for Type 2 Diabetes: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Crossover Study.JMIR research protocols · 2021Article
- Injured Self: Autobiographical Memory, Self-Concept, and Mental Health Risk in Breast Cancer Survivors.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Examining the Efficacy of HIV Risk-Reduction Counseling on the Sexual Risk Behaviors of a National Sample of Drug Abuse Treatment Clients: Analysis of Subgroups.AIDS and behavior · 2016Article
- Contributors to Patients' Ratings of Quality of Care Among Ethnically Diverse Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2016Article
- Distinguishing Selection Bias and Confounding Bias in Comparative Effectiveness Research.Medical care · 2016Article
- Heterogeneity in action: the role of passive personalization in comparative effectiveness research.Health economics · 2014Article
- Reducing racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes: the Coached Care (R2D2C2) project.Journal of general internal medicine · 2013Article
- Comparative effectiveness and the future of clinical research in diabetes.Diabetes care · 2013Article
- Using a population-based observational cohort study to address difficult comparative effectiveness research questions: the CEASAR study.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2013Observational
- Patient complexity and risk factor control among multimorbid patients with type 2 diabetes: results from the R2D2C2 study.Medical care · 2013Article
- Patient-centered or 'central' patient: Raising the veil of ignorance over randomization.Statistics in medicine · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInterest in comparative effectiveness research and the rising number of negative or "small effect" trials have stimulated research into differential response to treatment among subgroups of patients.
objectiveTo develop and test the Potential for Benefit Scale (PBS), a composite measure to identify subgroups of patients with differential potential for response to treatment, using diabetes as a model.
designCross-sectional and longitudinal cohort study. SUBJECTS AND
settingType 2 diabetes patients (n = 1361) were identified from 7 outpatient clinics serving a diverse population. Of these, 611 completed a 1-year follow-up. MEASURES: To represent patients' health status, we used the Total Illness Burden Index, the Physical Function Index of the SF-36, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, and the Diabetes Burden Scale. To represent personality characteristics related to health, we used the Provider-Dependent Health Care Orientation scale. We assessed the contribution of these measures to a composite scale of patients' potential for treatment response in terms of self-reported medication adherence and glycemic control.
resultsPrincipal components analysis confirmed associations among these measures. The internal consistency reliability of the PBS was adequate (Cronbach alpha = 0.65). Patients in the lowest versus highest quartile of the PBS reported poorer adherence (18% vs. 55%, P < 0.001) and poorer glycemic control at baseline (mean hemoglobin A1c values: 7.75 vs. 7.39, P < 0.001). Those in the highest quartile of the PBS also were more likely to reach target values for glycemic control (HbA1c <7%) at 1-year follow-up, (adjusted OR = 1.61, P < 0.05).
conclusionsThe PBS, a composite scale, may be helpful in identifying patients with differential potential for response to treatment.
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.