Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23549519›Full record

Trial reportDiabetologia2013

Structured personal care of type 2 diabetes: a 19 year follow-up of the study Diabetes Care in General Practice (DCGP).

L J Hansen, V Siersma, H Beck-Nielsen, N de Fine Olivarius

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

Trial report in Diabetologia, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01074762 (The Diabetes Care in General Practice Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT01074762 nacompletednot on this map

The Diabetes Care in General Practice Study: Randomised Controlled Trial of Structured Personal Care of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

TypeinterventionalSponsorResearch Unit Of General Practice, CopenhagenRan1989 to 1996Enrolled1,470ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Quality of Health Care, Health Services ResearchArmsStructured personal care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Epidemiology and Burden of Peripheral Artery Disease in People With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Literature Review.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. The impact of cancer on diabetes outcomes.BMC endocrine disorders · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

L J HansenResearch Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Øster Farimagsgade 5, PO Box 2099, 1014 Copenhagen K, Denmark.
V Siersma
H Beck-Nielsen
N de Fine Olivarius

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aims/hypothesisThis study is a 19 year observational follow-up of a pragmatic open multicentre cluster-randomised controlled trial of 6 years of structured personal diabetes care starting from diagnosis.

methodsA total of 1,381 patients aged ≥ 40 years and newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes were followed up in national registries for 19 years. Clinical follow-up was at 6 and 14 years after diabetes diagnosis. The original 6 year intervention included regular follow-up and individualised goal setting, supported by prompting of doctors, clinical guidelines, feedback and continuing medical education (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01074762). The registry-based endpoints were: incidence of any diabetes-related endpoint; diabetes-related death; all-cause mortality; myocardial infarction (MI); stroke; peripheral vascular disease; and microvascular disease.

resultsAt 14 year clinical follow-up, group differences in risk factors from the 6 year follow-up had levelled out, although the prevalence of (micro)albuminuria and level of triacylglycerols were lower in the intervention group. During 19 years of registry-based monitoring, all-cause mortality was not different between the intervention and comparison groups (58.9 vs 62.3 events per 1,000 patient-years, respectively; for structured personal care, HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83, 1.08, p = 0.40), but a lower risk emerged for fatal and non-fatal MI (27.3 vs 33.5, HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68, 0.98, p = 0.030) and any diabetes-related endpoint (69.5 vs 82.1, HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72, 0.97, p = 0.016). These differences persisted after extensive multivariable adjustment. CONCLUSIONS/

interpretationIn concert with features such as prompting, feedback, clinical guidelines and continuing medical education, individualisation of goal setting and drug treatment may safely be applied to treat patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes to lower the risk of diabetes complications.

Indexed as

Self CareAdultAgedDiabetes ComplicationsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisMyocardial InfarctionRegistriesRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeTriglycerides

Identifiers

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.