Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26584339›Full record

Trial reportJAMA ophthalmology2016

Effects of Prior Intensive Insulin Therapy and Risk Factors on Patient-Reported Visual Function Outcomes in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Cohort.

Writing Team for the DCCT/EDIC Research Group, Rose A Gubitosi-Klug, Wanjie Sun, Patricia A Cleary, Barbara H Braffett, Lloyd Paul Aiello, Arup Das, William Tamborlane, Ronald Klein

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA ophthalmology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT00360815 nacompletednot on this map

Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT)

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)Ran1983 to 1993Enrolled1,441ConditionsType 1 Diabetes MellitusArmsInsulin
NCT00360893 active not recruitingnot on this map

Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC)

TypeobservationalSponsorGeorge Washington UniversityRan1994 to 2027Enrolled1,441ConditionsType 1 Diabetes Mellitus
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. A1C: Episode 3.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

9 authors.

Writing Team for the DCCT/EDIC Research Group
Rose A Gubitosi-KlugUniversity Hospitals Case Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio.
Wanjie SunBiostatistics Center, George Washington University, Rockville, Maryland.
Patricia A ClearyBiostatistics Center, George Washington University, Rockville, Maryland.
Barbara H BraffettBiostatistics Center, George Washington University, Rockville, Maryland.
Lloyd Paul AielloBeetham Eye Institute, Joslin Diabetes Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Arup DasUniversity of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
William TamborlaneYale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Ronald KleinDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison.

Funding

Limited Competition for the Continuation of Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) Study Clinical Research Center (Collaborative U01)U01DK094157 · NIDDK · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI Ionut Bebu, Barbara Halina Braffett · 2011 to 2026
$97.6M
Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Data Coordinating CenterU01DK094176 · NIDDK · GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI BEBU, IONUT, BRAFFETT, BARBARA HALINA · 2012 to 2022
$30.8M
NIDDK NIH HHS U01 DK094157NIDDK NIH HHS U01 DK094176
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importancePreservation of vision in patients with diabetes mellitus is critical. Interventions to improve glycemic control through early intensive treatment of diabetes reduce rates of severe retinopathy and preserve visual acuity.

objectiveTo assess the effects of prior intensive insulin treatment and risk factors on patient-reported visual function in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) cohort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsCohort study of 1184 participants with type 1 diabetes from the DCCT/EDIC study (randomized clinical trial followed by an observational follow-up study) who completed the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ-25) during EDIC years 17 through 20 (September 1, 2009, through April 30, 2014) in 28 institutions across the United States and Canada. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the composite NEI-VFQ-25 score. Secondary outcomes were visual acuity (measured by the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study protocol), retinopathy level (determined by masked grading of stereoscopic color fundus photographs), and NEI-VFQ-25 subscale scores. The composite NEI-VFQ-25 scale and its subscales were scored 0 to 100, corresponding to poor to excellent function, respectively.

resultsThe overall average NEI-VFQ-25 score for 1184 DCCT/EDIC participants (mean [SD] age, 52.3 [6.9] years; 48% female) with a 30-year duration of diabetes was high (all participants: median, 91.7; interquartile range [IQR], 89.7-96.9; intensive treatment [n = 605]: median, 94.7; IQR, 91.0-97.2; conventional treatment [n = 579]: median, 94.0; IQR, 88.4-96.1; P = .006 for intensive vs conventional). After adjustment for sex, age, hemoglobin A1c level, and retinopathy level at DCCT baseline, the former intensive treatment group had a significant, albeit modest, improvement in overall NEI-VFQ-25 score compared with the former conventional diabetes treatment group (median difference, -1.0; 95% CI, -1.7 to -0.3; P = .006). This beneficial treatment effect was fully attributed to the prior glycemic control in DCCT (explained treatment effect: 100%). Those with visual acuity worse than 20/100 reported the largest decline in visual function (median difference, -21.0; 95% CI, -40.5 to -1.6; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the DCCT/EDIC cohort, patient-reported visual function remains high in both treatment groups, comparable to previous reports of overall health-related quality of life. Intensive diabetes therapy modestly improved NEI-VFQ-25 score 30 years after the start of the DCCT, the benefit underestimated owing to more nonparticipants from the conventional treatment group. Visual acuity had the greatest effect on patient-reported visual function from among all risk factors.

trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00360815 and NCT00360893.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultBlood GlucoseDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Diabetic RetinopathyFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeRisk FactorsSickness Impact ProfileSurveys and QuestionnairesBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin

Identifiers

PMID26584339
PMCPMC4825807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.