SynthesisBMJ open2018
Do quality improvement initiatives for diabetes care address social inequities? Secondary analysis of a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring equity in audit and feedback trials: Secondary analysis of a systematic review.PloS one · 2026Pooled it
- Consideration of inequalities in effectiveness trials of mHealth applications - a systematic assessment of studies from an umbrella review.International journal for equity in health · 2024Pooled it
- American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update.Endocrine practice : official journal of the American College of Endocrinology and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists · 2022Guideline
- Pooled it
- Health System Integration and Equity in Type 2 Diabetes Prevention: A Comparative Policy Analysis of Seven National Guidelines.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Mapping policies, regulations, and practice supports for medical office assistants in primary care: a scoping review.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- 5. Facilitating Positive Health Behaviors and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2025.Diabetes care · 2025Review
- Health and Racial Disparities in Diabetes Mellitus Prevalence, Management, Policies, and Outcomes in the United States.Journal of community medicine & public health · 2024Article
- Equity-focused evidence synthesis - A need to optimise our approach.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Design and Usability of an Avatar-Based Learning Program to Support Diabetes Education: Quality Improvement Study in Colombia.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023Article
- Developing and evaluating a SAFER model to screen for diabetes complications among people experiencing homelessness: a pilot study protocol.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2022Article
- The impact of race and socioeconomic factors on paediatric diabetes.EClinicalMedicine · 2021Review
- Population Health Management in Diabetes Care: Combining Clinical Audit, Risk Stratification, and Multidisciplinary Virtual Clinics in a Community Setting to Improve Diabetes Care in a Geographically Defined Population. An Integrated Diabetes Care Pilot in the North East Locality, Oxfordshire, UK.International journal of integrated care · 2020Article
- Including Vulnerable Populations in the Assessment of Data From Vulnerable Populations.Frontiers in big data · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSocially disadvantaged populations carry a disproportionate burden of diabetes-related morbidity and mortality. There is an emerging interest in quality improvement (QI) strategies in the care of patients with diabetes, however, the effect of these interventions on disadvantaged groups remains unclear.
objectiveThis is a secondary analysis of a systematic review that seeks to examine the extent of equity considerations in diabetes QI studies, specifically quantifying the proportion of studies that target interventions toward disadvantaged populations and conduct analyses on the impact of interventions on disadvantaged groups. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsStudies were identified using Medline, HealthStar and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care database. Randomised controlled trials assessing 12 QI strategies targeting health systems, healthcare professionals and/or patients for the management of adult outpatients with diabetes were eligible. The place of residence, race/ethnicity/culture/language, occupational status, gender/sexual identity, religious affiliations, education level, socioeconomic status, social capital, plus age, disability, sexual preferences and relationships (PROGRESS-Plus) framework was used to identify trials that focused on disadvantaged patient populations, to examine the types of equity-relevant factors that are being considered and to explore temporal trends in equity-relevant diabetes QI trials.
resultsOf the 278 trials that met the inclusion criteria, 95 trials had equity-relevant considerations. These include 64 targeted trials that focused on a disadvantaged population with the aim to improve the health status of that population and 31 general trials that undertook subgroup analyses to assess the extent to which their interventions may have had differential impacts on disadvantaged subgroups. Trials predominantly focused on race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status and place of residence as potential factors for disadvantage in patients receiving diabetes care.
conclusionsLess than one-third of diabetes QI trials included equity-relevant considerations, limiting the relevance and applicability of their data to disadvantaged populations. There is a need for better data collection, reporting, analysis and interventions on the social determinants of health that may influence the health outcomes of patients with diabetes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42013005165.
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.