Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25777998›Full record

ReviewCurrent diabetes reports2015

Clinical trials in youth-onset type 2 diabetes: needs, barriers, and options.

Philip Zeitler, Hubert S Chou, Kenneth C Copeland, Mitchell Geffner

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 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. A Review of Interventional Trials in Youth-Onset Type 2 Diabetes: Challenges and Opportunities.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2021
    Review
  14. Long-Term Complications in Youth-Onset Type 2 Diabetes.The New England journal of medicine · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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.

Philip ZeitlerDepartment of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital Colorado, University of Colorado School of Medicine, 13123 E 16th Avenue, Aurora, CO, USA, Philip.zeitler@childrenscolorado.org.
Hubert S Chou
Kenneth C Copeland
Mitchell Geffner

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Youth-onset type 2 diabetes (T2D) is increasingly recognized as a disorder with substantial risk for long-term metabolic, cardiovascular, and renal morbidity and mortality, as well as individual and societal burden. Recent studies suggest that the disorder differs from adult-onset T2D in a variety of ways and that there is an urgent need for an expanded set of treatment options. However, demographic, economic, and social challenges limit the number of eligible candidates for clinical trials in youth-onset T2D, and a growing number trials mandated by regulatory agencies have created a circumstance in which too many trials are chasing too few eligible participants. A solution to this situation will require novel approaches to clinical trial design incorporating collaboration among clinical investigators, pharmaceutical sponsors, and regulatory agencies. If successful, this approach could also serve as a model for clinical trials in other rare and understudied pediatric disorders.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicHealth Services Needs and DemandAdolescentAge of OnsetDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansSocial Control, FormalSocioeconomic FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID25777998

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.