ArticleDiabetes technology & therapeutics2014
Diabetes guidelines may delay timely adjustments during treatment and might contribute to clinical inertia.
Article in Diabetes technology & therapeutics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- BrazIliaN Type 1 & 2 DiabetEs Disease Registry (BINDER): longitudinal, real-world study of diabetes mellitus control in Brazil.Frontiers in clinical diabetes and healthcare · 2022Article
- In guidelines physicians trust? Physician perspective on adherence to medical guidelines for type 2 diabetes mellitus.Heliyon · 2020Article
- Intensification to injectable therapy in type 2 diabetes: mixed methods study (protocol).BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Clinical Inertia in Type 2 Diabetes Patients in Primary Health Care Clinics in Central Bosnia.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2018Article
- PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT OF INSULIN-ASSOCIATED HYPOGLYCEMIA IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS.Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2016Article
- Clinical pharmacists´ interventions in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review.Pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical inertia and poor knowledge by many physicians play an important role in delaying diabetes control. Among other guidelines, the Position Statement of the American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes on Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes is a respected guideline with high impact on this subject in terms of influencing physicians in the definition of strategic approach to overcome poor glycemic control. But, on the other hand, it carries a recommendation that might contribute to clinical inertia because it can delay the needed implementation of more vigorous, intensive, and effective strategies to overcome poor glycemic control within a reasonable time frame during the evolution of the disease. The same is true with other respected algorithms from different diabetes associations. Together with pharmacological interventions, diabetes education and more intensive blood glucose monitoring in the initial phases after the diagnosis are key strategies for the effective control of diabetes. The main reason why a faster glycemic control should be implemented in an effective and safe way is to boost the confidence and the compliance of the patient to the recommendations of the diabetes care team. Better and faster results in glycemic control can only be safely achieved with educational strategies, structured self-monitoring of blood glucose, and adequate pharmacological therapy in the majority of cases.
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.