Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25526759›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2015

Use of an Electronic Medical Record (EMR) to Identify Glycemic Intensification Strategies in Type 2 Diabetes.

Mary T Korytkowski, Maria Brooks, Manuel Lombardero, Dilhari DeAlmeida, Justin Kanter, Vasudev Magaji, Trevor Orchard, Linda Siminerio

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Ertugliflozin and Sitagliptin Co-initiation in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: The VERTIS SITA Randomized Study.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2018
    Article
  4. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mary T KorytkowskiDivision of Endocrinology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA mtk7@pitt.edu.
Maria BrooksGraduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Manuel LombarderoGraduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Dilhari DeAlmeidaDepartment of Health Information Management, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Justin KanterUPMC, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Vasudev MagajiLehigh Valley Health Network, Diabetes and Endocrinology, Allentown, PA, USA.
Trevor OrchardGraduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Linda SiminerioDivision of Endocrinology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
University of Pittsburgh · USLehigh Valley Hospital-Pocono · USUPMC Health System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent treatment guidelines for type 2 diabetes (T2D) recommend individualized intensification of therapy for glycated hemoglobin (A1C) ≥ 7% in most patients. The purpose of this investigation was to explore the ability of an electronic medical record (EMR) to identify glycemic intensification strategies among T2D patients receiving pharmacologic therapy.

methodsPatient records between 2005 and 2011 with documentation of A1C and active prescriptions for any diabetes medications were queried to identify potential candidates for intensification based on A1C ≥ 7% while on 1-2 oral diabetes medications (ODM). Patients with follow-up A1C values within 1 year of index A1C were grouped according to intensification with insulin, GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA), a new class of ODM, or no intensification. Changes in A1C and continuation of intensification therapy were determined.

resultsA total of 4921 patients meeting inclusion criteria were intensified with insulin (n = 416), GLP-1RA (n = 68), ODM (n = 1408), or no additional therapy (n = 3029). Patients receiving insulin had higher baseline (9.3 ± 2.0 vs 8.3 ± 1.2 vs 8.3 ± 1.3 vs 7.6 ± 1.0%, P < .0001) and follow-up A1C (8.1 ± 1.6 vs 7.5 ± 1.2 vs 7.6 ± 1.3 vs 7.2 ± 1.1%, P < .0001) despite experiencing larger absolute A1C reductions (-1.2 ± 2.1 vs -0.8 ± 1.4 vs -0.7 ± 1.4 vs -0.3 ± 1.1%, P < .0001). Patients receiving GLP-1RA were more obese at baseline (BMI: 33.6 ± 7.1 vs 37.7 ± 6.1 vs 33.7 ± 6.8 vs 32.9 ± 7.1 kg/m(2), P < .0001) and follow-up (BMI: 33.9 ± 7.3 vs 36.6 ± 6.1 vs 33.8 ± 7.0 vs 32.4 ± 7.0 kg/m(2), P < .0001) despite experiencing more absolute weight reduction. Insulin was the most and GLP-1RA the least likely therapy to be continued.

conclusionsAn EMR allows identification of prescribing practices and compliance with T2D treatment guidelines. Patients receiving intensification of glycemic medications had baseline A1C >8% suggesting that treatment recommendations are not being followed.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsAgedBiomarkersBlood GlucoseBlood PressureBody Mass IndexDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleGlucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor AgonistsGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinMaleMedication Therapy ManagementMiddle AgedBiomarkersBlood GlucoseGlucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor AgonistsGlycated HemoglobinHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinelectronic health recordshospital information systemshypoglycemic agentstype 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID25526759
PMCPMC4604553
OpenAlexW2050447819

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.