ArticleThe Australasian medical journal2015
A comparative drug utilisation study of the treatment of diabetes in Malaysia and Australia.
Article in The Australasian medical journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-Effectiveness of Insulin Glargine and Insulin Detemir in the Basal Regimen for Naïve Insulin Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) in Malaysia.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2020Article
- The Association Between Diabetes and Cognitive Function in Later Life.Current aging science · 2019Article
- Penetration of new antidiabetic medications in East Asian countries and the United States: A cross-national comparative study.PloS one · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOnce a disease of developed countries, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has become widespread worldwide. For people with T2DM, achievement of therapeutic outcomes demands the rational and quality use of medicine.
aimsThe primary aim of this study was to examine the prevalence of diabetes and prescribing patterns of anti-diabetic medications in Australia and Malaysia.
methodsThe most recent, publicly available, statistical reports (2004-2008) on the use of medicines published in Australia and in Malaysia were evaluated. Defined daily doses (DDDs/1,000 population/day) were derived from the reports and used to rank and compare individual drug use.
resultsThere was an increasing trend in the prevalence of diabetes in Australia, although there is a greater predicted increase in prevalence for Malaysia. While drugs used for the treatment of diabetes were not the most highly used drugs in Australia, their use increased during the study period, from 42.64 to 48.61 DDD/1,000/day. Anti-diabetic drugs were the most frequently dispensed class of drugs in Malaysia. Although the total consumption of anti-diabetic drugs in Malaysia decreased between 2006 and 2007 (from 40.30 to 39.72), this was followed by a marked increase to 46.69 in 2008. There was a marked reduction in the dispensing of insulin in Malaysia from 2004 to 2007 (7.77 to 3.23).
conclusionThe use of drugs to treat diabetes does not reflect the usage patterns found in Australia. Effective drug use reviews are required to ensure impartial access in middle- and low-income countries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.