ArticleHeliyon2020
In guidelines physicians trust? Physician perspective on adherence to medical guidelines for type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Article in Heliyon, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers and facilitators of adherence to clinical practice guidelines in Germany-A systematic review.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2025Pooled it
- A Pilot Study on the Evaluation of an Inpatient Glycaemic Management Protocol for Enteral Feeding in People with Diabetes.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Barriers in prescribing antidiabetic medications with cardiovascular benefits: practice, experience, and attitudes of GPs in Croatia.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Analytical validation of Exandra: a clinical decision support system for promoting guideline-directed therapy of type-2 diabetes in primary care - a collaborative study with experts from Diabetes Canada.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Are doctors using more preventive medication for cardiovascular disease? A Swedish cross-sectional study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2023Article
- Assessing Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines Among Primary Care Physicians in Bahrain: A Cross-sectional Study.Oman medical journal · 2023Article
- Inadequate management of cardiovascular risk factors prior to admission for an acute coronary event.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2022Article
- Factors Associated with Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Results of a Spanish Delphi Consensus.Journal of diabetes research · 2021Article
- The approach to the screening for visual impairment of children and adolescents by family medicine physicians in the Eastern Region of Saudi Arabia.Journal of family & community medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsAdherence to treatment guidelines and treatment success are low in Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study aims to capture the physician perspective on T2DM guideline adherence and identify levers for increasing adherence.
methodsA survey among German physicians captured the perceived value of 4 areas in the national treatment guideline (NVL), 13 possible barriers, and 9 possible enablers for guideline adherence. Perceived value was assessed by ranking 4 NVL areas by implementation difficulty and impact on treatment success. Barriers and enablers were assessed by rating their influence on guideline deviation and adherence. The consistency of results across subgroups was assessed using Fisher's exact test.
resultsResponses from 46 physicians showed a strong consensus about the value of each NVL area. Physicians perceived patient inability and demotivation to be the strongest adherence barriers (93%, 78%). All queried enablers were approved by ≥ 50% of participants. Physicians considered cross-provider collaboration and electronic therapy decision support as strongest enablers (85%, 80%). Consistency was high between subgroups.
conclusionThis study suggests that physicians consider patient-related factors to be stronger barriers for guideline adherence than physician-related factors. Finding opportunities to increase physician buy-in is important for better guideline adherence. In this study, physicians voiced appreciation for adherence enablers based on digital solutions to support the care process and to reduce the complexity of therapy decisions.
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.