ArticlePatient preference and adherence2016
Impact of telephonic interviews on persistence and daily adherence to insulin treatment in insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes patients: dropout study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Use of Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart in the Management of Diabetes Mellitus: Expert Panel Recommendations on Appropriate Practice Patterns.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of sequential telephonic interviews on treatment persistence and daily adherence to insulin injections among insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes patients initiated on different insulin regimens in a 3-month period.
methodsA total of 1,456 insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes (mean [standard deviation, SD] age: 56.0 [12.0] years, 49.1% were females) initiated on insulin therapy and consecutively randomized to sequential (n=733) and single (n=723) telephonic interview groups were included. Data on insulin treatment and self-reported blood glucose values were obtained via telephone interview. Logistic regression analysis was performed for factors predicting increased likelihood of persistence and skipping an injection.
resultsOverall, 76.8% patients (83.2% in sequential vs 70.3% in single interview group, (P<0.001) remained on insulin treatment at the third month. Significantly higher rate for skipping doses was noted in basal bolus than in other regimens (27.0% vs 15.0% for premixed and 15.8% basal insulin, respectively, P<0.0001). Logistic regression analysis revealed sequential telephonic interview (odds ratio [OR], 1.531; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.093-2.143; P=0.013), higher hemoglobin A1c levels (OR, 1.090; 95% CI, 0.999-1.189; P=0.049), and less negative appraisal of insulin therapy as significant predictors of higher persistence. Basal bolus regimen (OR, 1.583; 95% CI, 1.011-2.479; P=0.045) and higher hemoglobin A1c levels (OR, 1.114; 95% CI, 1.028-1.207; P=0.008) were the significant predictors of increased likelihood of skipping an injection.
conclusionOur findings revealed positive influence of sequential telephonic interview, although including no intervention in treatment, on achieving better treatment persistence in type 2 diabetes patients initiating insulin.
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.