Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25937542›Full record

Trial reportDiabetes research and clinical practice2015

Change in cardio-protective medication and health-related quality of life after diagnosis of screen-detected diabetes: Results from the ADDITION-Cambridge cohort.

J A Black, G H Long, S J Sharp, L Kuznetsov, C E Boothby, S J Griffin, R K Simmons

Open access · hybridAbstract readPragmatic Clinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetes research and clinical practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Concept analysis of diabetes-related quality of life.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025
    Review
  3. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

J A BlackMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 285, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
G H LongMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 285, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
S J SharpMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 285, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
L KuznetsovMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 285, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
C E BoothbyMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 285, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom.
S J GriffinMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 285, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom; Primary Care Unit, Cambridge Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge CB2 0SR, United Kingdom.
R K SimmonsMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 285, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom. Electronic address: rks34@cam.ac.uk.
MRC Epidemiology Unit · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Department of Health 08/116/300Department of Health RP-PG-0606-1259Medical Research Council G0001164Medical Research Council MC_U106179474Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/4Wellcome Trust G061895
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsEstablishing a balance between the benefits and harms of treatment is important among individuals with screen-detected diabetes, for whom the burden of treatment might be higher than the burden of the disease. We described the association between cardio-protective medication and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among individuals with screen-detected diabetes.

methods867 participants with screen-detected diabetes underwent clinical measurements at diagnosis, one and five years. General HRQoL (EQ5D) was measured at baseline, one- and five-years, and diabetes-specific HRQoL (ADDQoL-AWI) and health status (SF-36) at one and five years. Multivariable linear regression was used to quantify the association between change in HRQoL and change in cardio-protective medication.

resultsThe median (IQR) number of prescribed cardio-protective agents was 2 (1 to 3) at diagnosis, 3 (2 to 4) at one year and 4 (3 to 5) at five years. Change in cardio-protective medication was not associated with change in HRQoL from diagnosis to one year. From one year to five years, change in cardio-protective agents was not associated with change in the SF-36 mental health score. One additional agent was associated with an increase in the SF-36 physical health score (2.1; 95%CI 0.4, 3.8) and an increase in the EQ-5D (0.05; 95%CI 0.02, 0.08). Conversely, one additional agent was associated with a decrease in the ADDQoL-AWI (-0.32; 95%CI -0.51, -0.13), compared to no change.

conclusionsWe found little evidence that increases in the number of cardio-protective medications impacted negatively on HRQoL among individuals with screen-detected diabetes over five years.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeAdultAgedCardiotonic AgentsCardiovascular DiseasesCohort StudiesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Diabetic AngiopathiesDrug PrescriptionsFemaleHealth StatusHumansMaleMass ScreeningMental HealthMiddle AgedCardiotonic AgentsDiabetesHRQoLMedication

Identifiers

PMID25937542
PMCPMC4504034
OpenAlexW2083504039

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.