Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28435304›Full record

ArticleDiabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy2017

Comparative effectiveness of glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with GLP-1 receptor agonists: a network meta-analysis of placebo-controlled and active-comparator trials.

Michelle E Orme, Hiep Nguyen, Jackie Y Lu, Susan A Thomas

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. ANDREW: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes on Persistent Treatment with Dulaglutide.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2020
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michelle E OrmeICERA Consulting Ltd, Swindon, UK.
Hiep NguyenAstraZeneca, Wilmington, DE.
Jackie Y LuAstraZeneca, Fort Washington, PA, USA.
Susan A ThomasAstraZeneca, Fort Washington, PA, USA.
AstraZeneca (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical studies of patients with type 2 diabetes show that GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) improve glycemic control and promote weight loss. We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) of placebo- and active-controlled randomized trials to assess the comparative effectiveness of liraglutide, albiglutide, dulaglutide, and exenatide twice daily and once weekly, with a focus on glycemic control. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (up to December 2014) for core registration programs for US-approved GLP-1 RAs. Patients reaching an A

resultsThe base-case NMA used 23 trials reporting A

conclusionThis was a comprehensive assessment of the comparative effectiveness of GLP-1 RAs and A

Indexed as

comparative effectivenessGLP-1 RAsglucagon-like peptide-1-receptor agonistsnetwork meta-analysistype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID28435304
PMCPMC5386609
OpenAlexW2604152120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.