Observational studyJournal of diabetes2020
Observational study evaluating the effectiveness of physician-targeted education for improving glycemic management of patients with type 2 diabetes (BEYOND II).
Observational study in Journal of diabetes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Higher versus standard starting dose of insulin glargine 100 U/mL in overweight or obese Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: Results of a multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled trial (BEYOND VII).Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2020Trial
- Clinical Heart fAilure Management Program: Changing the practice by partnering primary care and specialists (CHAMP-HF).International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2024Article
- Efficacy and Safety of a Decision Support Intervention for Basal Insulin Self-Titration Assisted by the Nurse in Outpatients with T2DM: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2021Article
- Observational study evaluating the effectiveness of physician-targeted education for improving glycemic management of patients with type 2 diabetes (BEYOND II).Journal of diabetes · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBecause there has been no quality improvement initiatives targeting patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) receiving basal insulin therapy, this study evaluated the effectiveness of physician-targeted education for optimizing glycemic management in these patients in China.
methodsThis multicenter open-label observational study conducted across China had a baseline sample survey, followed by a 6-month education program, and ended with a post-education sample survey. Education based on T2D treatment guidelines was given at Months 1 and 3, and was reinforced by self-audit every month. Each hospital enrolled 100 patients with T2D receiving basal insulin at both the baseline and post-education survey. The primary outcome was the proportion of hospitals meeting individual improvement goals. The goal setting was based on the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c <7.0% in each hospital at the time of the baseline survey.
resultsOverall, the individual improvement goal was achieved by 35 centers (49%). Hospitals with poor glycemic management at the baseline survey had higher possibility to improve at post-education survey. Two large sample surveys at baseline and post-education showed improved glucose management among these hospitals. A higher proportion of patients achieved HbA1c <7.0% in the post-education survey (27.2% vs 36.5%; P < 0.001) with reduced HbA1c levels (8.10% vs 7.72%; P < 0.001). Questionnaires from 723 physicians showed that confidence and practice of basal insulin use were significantly improved.
conclusionsPhysician-targeted education improved glycemic management of patients with T2D in 71 hospitals in China, and was more effective at hospitals with poor glycemic management at the baseline survey.
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.