Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25373405›Full record

ArticleMedical care2015

Revisiting Disparities in Quality of Care Among US Adults With Diabetes in the Era of Individualized Care, NHANES 2007-2010.

Neda Laiteerapong, Paige C Fairchild, Chia-Hung Chou, Marshall H Chin, Elbert S Huang

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical care, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Individualized Therapy for Hypothyroidism: Is T4 Enough for Everyone?The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2020
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Neda LaiteerapongSection of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.
Paige C Fairchild
Chia-Hung Chou
Marshall H Chin
Elbert S Huang
University of Chicago · US

Funding

Pilot and Feasibility ProgramP30DK020595 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI RONALD N COHEN · 2013 to 2026
$20.9M
Research Design, Data, and Analytics CoreP30DK092949 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI ELBERT S. HUANG · 2011 to 2026
$10.0M
Translational Research Core - Health Engagement & Action Translational (HEAT)P30DK092924 · NIDDK · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI Alyce Sophia Adams, HILARY Kessler SELIGMAN · 2011 to 2026
$9.2M
Research and Mentorship in Improving Diabetes CareK24DK071933 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI CHIN, MARSHALL H · 2005 to 2014
$1.6M
Linking the Legacy Effect in Type 2 Diabetes to Clinical Decision MakingK23DK097283 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI LAITEERAPONG, NEDA · 2012 to 2016
$880k
NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK097283NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK071933NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK020595NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092924NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092949
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiabetes quality of care standards promote uniform goals and are used routinely for performance measurement and reimbursement. Diabetes health disparities have been characterized using these universal goals. However, guidelines emphasize individualized goals.

objectivesTo assess diabetes care disparities using individualized goals to (1) determine their racial/ethnic distribution and (2) compare disparities using individualized versus uniform goals. RESEARCH DESIGN, SUBJECTS, AND MEASURES: A nationally representative sample of non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic adults with self-reported diabetes aged 20 years or more in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007-2010. Individualized glycemic goals (A1C<6.5%, <7.0%, or <8.0%) assigned based on age, duration, complications, and comorbidity, and cholesterol goals [low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) <70 or <100 mg/dL] assigned based on cardiovascular history.

resultsMore Hispanics were recommended an individualized A1C<7.0% compared with whites (54% vs. 42%, P=0.008). Fewer blacks and Hispanics were recommended an individualized LDL<70 mg/dL than whites (21% and 19% vs. 28%, P=0.02 and 0.001). Fewer Hispanics had adequate individualized A1C control (56% vs. 68%, P<0.001), and fewer blacks and Hispanics had adequate individualized LDL control (31% and 36% vs. 51%, P≤0.001 and P=0.004). A uniform A1C<7% goal did not reveal disparities in glycemic control; individualized A1C and LDL, blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg, and nonsmoking was achieved by few adults (18%), and fewer blacks and Hispanics than whites (6% and 11% vs. 22%, P<0.001 and P=0.005).

conclusionsIndividualized goals for diabetes care may unearth greater racial/ethnic disparities in clinical performance compared with uniform goals. Diabetes performance measures should include individualized goals to prevent worsening disparities in diabetes outcomes.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBlack or African AmericanBlood GlucoseBlood PressureCholesterol, LDLComorbidityDiabetes ComplicationsDiabetes MellitusFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHealthcare DisparitiesHispanic or LatinoHumansMaleMiddle AgedBlood GlucoseCholesterol, LDLGlycated Hemoglobin

Identifiers

PMID25373405
PMCPMC4394649
OpenAlexW2314776757

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.