Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20970870›Full record

Trial reportDiabetes research and clinical practice2011

Comparison of fasting capillary glucose variability between insulin glargine and NPH.

Panwei Mu, Hongyun Lu, Guochao Zhang, Yanming Chen, Jingyi Fu, Manman Wang, Jiong Shu, Longyi Zeng

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetes research and clinical practice, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02587741 (Comparison of Diabetes Retinopathy Among Type 2 Diabetic Patients Treated With Different Regimens), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT02587741 early_phase1unknown statusstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Diabetes Retinopathy Among Type 2 Diabetic Patients Treated With Different Regimens: a Multicentre Randomized Parallel-group Clinical Trial

Ran2015Enrolled600Registered outcomes6Posted comparisons0ConditionsDiabetic RetinopathyArmsLantus, Metformin, Novomix30
Open the trial in the graph
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Twenty Years of Insulin Gla-100: A Systematic Evaluation of Its Efficacy and Safety in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2022
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Panwei MuDepartment of Endocrinology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510630, China. mpwsums@126.com
Hongyun Lu
Guochao Zhang
Yanming Chen
Jingyi Fu
Manman Wang
Jiong Shu
Longyi Zeng
Sun Yat-sen University · CNThird Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare coefficient of variation of fasting capillary blood glucose (FBG) between insulin glargine and NPH in T2DM with poorly controlled by oral antidiabetic drugs. The results demonstrated that insulin glargine was more potent in improving glycemic control than NPH with stable FBG.

Indexed as

AdultBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleGlycated HemoglobinHomeostasisHumansHyperglycemiaHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinInsulin GlargineInsulin, IsophaneInsulin, Long-ActingInsulin ResistanceBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinInsulin GlargineInsulin, IsophaneInsulin, Long-Acting

Identifiers

PMID20970870
OpenAlexW2062935104

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.