Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26391392›Full record

ArticleCurrent diabetes reports2015

Strategies for improving cardiovascular health in women with diabetes mellitus: a review of the evidence.

Rajesh K Jain, Neda Laiteerapong

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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, 6 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Rajesh K JainDepartment of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, University of Chicago Medicine, 5841 S Maryland Ave, AMB M267-MC1027, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA. rajesh.jain@uchospitals.edu.
Neda LaiteerapongDepartment of General Internal Medicine, University of Chicago Medicine, 5841 S Maryland Ave, MC 2007, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA. nlaiteer@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu.
University of Chicago · US

Funding

Research Design, Data, and Analytics CoreP30DK092949 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI MARSHALL H CHIN · 2011 to 2026
$10.0M
Linking the Legacy Effect in Type 2 Diabetes to Clinical Decision MakingK23DK097283 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI LAITEERAPONG, NEDA · 2012 to 2016
$880k
NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK097283NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092949
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Knowledge about cardiovascular (CV) disease in women with diabetes mellitus (DM) has changed substantially over the past 20 years. Coronary artery disease, strokes, and peripheral vascular disease affect women with DM at higher rates than the general population of women. Lifestyle therapies, such as dietary changes, physical activity, and smoking cessation, offer substantial benefits to women with DM. Of the pharmacotherapies, statins offer the most significant benefits but may not be well tolerated in some women. Aspirin may also benefit high-risk women. Other pharmacotherapies, such as fibrates, ezetimibe, niacin, fish oil, and hormone replacement therapy, remain unproven and, in some cases, potentially dangerous to women with DM. To reduce CV events, risks to women with DM must be better publicized and additional research must be done. Finally, advancements in health care delivery must target high-risk women with DM to lower risk factors and effectively improve cardiovascular health.

Indexed as

Diabetes ComplicationsDiabetes MellitusAnimalsCardiovascular DiseasesFemaleHumansRisk FactorsSex CharacteristicsStrokeCardiovascular diseaseDiabetes mellitusFemaleGenderMyocardial infarctionStroke

Identifiers

PMID26391392
PMCPMC4886737
OpenAlexW1942962891

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.