Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29633237›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2018

Use of Intensive Glycemic Management in Older Adults with Diabetes Mellitus.

Suzanne V Arnold, Kasia J Lipska, Jingyan Wang, Leo Seman, Sanjeev N Mehta, Mikhail Kosiborod

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Factors associated with potential over- and undertreatment of hyperglycaemia and annual measurement of HbADiabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2021
    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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Suzanne V ArnoldDepartment of Cardiology, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri.
Kasia J LipskaSection of Endocrinology, Dept of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Jingyan WangDepartment of Cardiology, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri.
Leo SemanBoehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Ridgefield, Connecticut.
Sanjeev N MehtaJoslin Diabetes Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Mikhail KosiborodDepartment of Cardiology, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri.
University of Missouri–Kansas City · USBoehringer Ingelheim (United States) · USJoslin Diabetes Center · USYale University · US

Funding

SPECIAL ASSAY COREP30DK036836 · NIDDK · JOSLIN DIABETES CENTER · PI ROHIT N. KULKARNI · 1986 to 2026
$50.5M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK036836
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo examine the proportion of older adults with diabetes mellitus treated with tight glucose control and the factors associated with this practice.

designCross-sectional analysis.

settingOutpatient sites in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry (N=151).

participantsAdults aged 75 and older with type 2 diabetes mellitus (N=42,669). MEASUREMENTS: Participants were categorized based on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and glucose-lowering medications: poor control (HbA1c >9%), moderate control (HbA1c 8-9%), conservative control (HbA1c 7-8%), tight control (HbA1c <7%) with low-risk agents (low risk for hypoglycemia), tight control with high-risk agents, and diet control (HbA1c <7% taking no glucose-lowering medications). We used hierarchical logistic regression to examine participant and site factors associated with tight control and high-risk agents versus conservative or tight control and low-risk agents.

resultsOf 30,696 participants without diet-controlled diabetes, 5,596 (18%) had moderate or poor control, 9,227 (30%) had conservative control, 7,893 (26%) had tight control taking low-risk agents, and 7,980 (26%) had tight control taking high-risk agents. Older age, male sex, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and coronary artery disease were each independently associated with greater odds of tight control with high-risk agents. There were no differences according to practice specialty (endocrinology, primary care, cardiology) in how aggressively participants were managed.

conclusionOne-quarter of U.S. older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus are tightly controlled with glucose-lowering medications that have a high risk of hypoglycemia. These results suggest potential overtreatment of a substantial proportion of people and should encourage further efforts to translate guidelines to daily practice.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2HypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsAgedBlood GlucoseCross-Sectional StudiesDiet, DiabeticFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansMaleRisk AdjustmentRisk AssessmentUnited StatesBlood GlucoseGlycated HemoglobinHypoglycemic Agentsdiabetes mellitusglucose controlhypoglycemia

Identifiers

PMID29633237
PMCPMC7032960
OpenAlexW2797967435

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.