Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25887759›Full record

Trial reportBMC family practice2015

Shared decision making in type 2 diabetes with a support decision tool that takes into account clinical factors, the intensity of treatment and patient preferences: design of a cluster randomised (OPTIMAL) trial.

Henk den Ouden, Rimke C Vos, Carla Reidsma, Guy E H M Rutten

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC family practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02285881 (Shared Decision Making in Type 2 Diabetes With a Support Decision Tool That Takes Into Account Patient Preferences, Clinical Factors and the Intensity of Treatment), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

NCT02285881 nacompletednot on this map

Shared Decision Making in Type 2 Diabetes With a Support Decision Tool That Takes Into Account Patient Preferences, Clinical Factors and the Intensity of Treatment: Design of a Cluster Randomised Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUMC UtrechtRan2012 to 2016Enrolled153ConditionsType 2 Diabetes MellitusArmsShared decision making
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Effectiveness of shared goal setting and decision making to achieve treatment targets in type 2 diabetes patients: A cluster-randomized trial (OPTIMAL).Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Treatment Preferences for Novel Type 2 Diabetes Oral Medications: Insights from the Asian Diabetes Patient Preference Study.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A dashboard-based system for supporting diabetes care.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Henk den OudenJulius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Str. 6.131, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. H.denOuden@umcutrecht.nl.
Rimke C VosJulius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Str. 6.131, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. R.C.Vos-3@umcutrecht.nl.
Carla ReidsmaJulius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Str. 6.131, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Carlareidsma@hotmail.com.
Guy E H M RuttenJulius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Str. 6.131, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. G.E.H.M.Rutten@umcutrecht.nl.
University Medical Center Utrecht · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNo more than 10-15% of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients achieve all treatment goals regarding glycaemic control, lipids and blood pressure. Shared decision making (SDM) should increase that percentage; however, not all support decision tools are appropriate. Because the ADDITION-Europe study demonstrated two (almost) equally effective treatments but with slightly different intensities, it may be a good starting point to discuss with the patients their diabetes treatment, taking into account both the intensity of treatment, clinical factors and patients' preferences. We aim to evaluate whether such an approach increases the proportion of patients that achieve all three treatment goals.

methodsIn a cluster-randomised trial including 40 general practices, that participated until 2009 in the ADDITION Study, 150 T2DM patients 60-80 years, known with T2DM for 8-15 years, will be included. Practices are randomised a second time, i.e. intervention practices in the ADDITION study could be control practices in the current study and vice versa. For the GPs from the intervention group a 2-hour training in SDM was developed as well as a decision support tool to be used during the consultation. GPs plan the first visit with the patients to decide on the intensity of the treatment, personalised targets and the priorities of treatment. The control group will continue with the treatment they were allocated to in the ADDITION study. FOLLOW-UP: 24 months. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who achieve all three treatment goals. Secondary outcomes are the proportion of patients who achieve five treatment goals (HbA1c, blood pressure, total cholesterol, body weight, not smoking), evaluation of the SDM process (SDM-Q9 and CPS), satisfaction with the treatment (DTSQ), wellbeing and quality of life (W-BQ12, ADD QoL-19), health status (SF-36, EQ-5D) and coping (DCMQ). The proportions of achieved treatment goals will be compared between both groups. For the secondary outcomes mixed models will be used. The Medical Research Ethics Committee of the University Medical Centre Utrecht has approved the study protocol (Protocol number: 11-153). DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence whether an intervention with a multi-faceted decision support tool increases the proportion of achieved personalised goals in type 2 diabetes patients.

trial registrationNCT02285881, November 4, 2014.

Indexed as

Decision MakingDecision Support Systems, ClinicalAgedAged, 80 and overDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Disease ManagementFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeResearch DesignSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID25887759
PMCPMC4369865
OpenAlexW2121645523

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.