ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2013
Beneficial and detrimental effects of glycemic control on cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The association between diabetes and dermal microvascular dysfunction non-invasively assessed by laser Doppler with local thermal hyperemia: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2017Pooled it
- Brain region-specific genome-wide deoxyribonucleic acid methylation analysis in patients with Alzheimer's disease.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2023Article
- Diabetes Management - Lowering Cardiovascular Risk.European cardiology · 2014Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epidemiological data demonstrates that improved regulation of blood glucose correlates with better cardiovascular (CV) outcomes. Conversely, some interventional studies have demonstrated that tight glycemic control has no benefit or can even result in worse CV outcomes. These conclusions parallel the paradox that glycemic control has proven beneficial for microvascular outcomes, while few studies have demonstrated significant macrovascular benefits. This imprecise understanding conveys the need to better comprehend the mechanisms of glycemic control and its impact on CV disease. Such variations in data also require a more comprehensive approach to diabetes and CV disease in which multiple biomarkers such as low density lipoprotein (LDL), low adiponectin, elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) and well established clinical parameters such as high blood pressure, weight, and functional status are incorporated into clinical decision making. Reliance on one parameter in isolation such as glycemic control and one biomarker such as HbA1C does not provide an accurate assessment of CV outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23314689What 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.