Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25772641›Full record

ReviewCurrent diabetes reports2015

Non-ICU hospital care of diabetes mellitus in the elderly population.

Janice L Gilden, Aditi Gupta

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current diabetes reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Janice L GildenChicago Medical School, Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, North Chicago, IL, 60064, USA, Janice.gilden@rosalindfranklin.edu.
Aditi Gupta
Captain James A. Lovell Federal Health Care Center · USRosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The concept of lower is better when considering the goal for glycemic control in patients with diabetes mellitus has recently been challenged due to recent studies, such as ACCORD, ADVANCE, and VADT, which have observed increased morbidity and mortality from intensive control, especially in older adults, and in those with long duration of diabetes disease and chronic complications. Although evidence in younger patients suggest that blood glucose levels should not be above 180 mg/dl (10.0 mmol/l), there are many unanswered questions and controversies regarding the benefits and risks, methods to achieve and maintain these levels while avoiding hypoglycemia (<70 mg% (3.9 mmol/l)) in the older population. Since the population is aging with a greater life expectancy, it is crucial that these questions be answered. Although several studies of inpatient non-ICU diabetes management have been published, few include older patients. This review will examine available recommendations and explore those controversies regarding non-ICU hospital management in this vulnerable patient population. Additional conditions that impact upon achieving glycemic control will also be discussed. Finally, the older individual has many special needs which may be more important to consider than in young or middle-aged individuals, when transitioning care from in-hospital to home in a patient-centered approach, as recommended by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and European Society for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).

Indexed as

HospitalsIntensive Care UnitsPatient CareAgedClinical Trials as TopicDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansHypoglycemic AgentsHypoglycemic Agents

Identifiers

PMID25772641
OpenAlexW2001200903

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.