Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36716032›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Continuity of Medication Use by US Adults With Diabetes, 2005-2019.

Puneet Kaur Chehal, Tegveer S Uppal, Sara Turbow, Gail Fernandes, J Sonya Haw, Megha K Shah, Swapnil Rajpathak, K M Venkat Narayan, Mohammed K Ali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
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

9 authors.

Puneet Kaur ChehalDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta.
Tegveer S UppalEmory Global Diabetes Research Center, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Sara TurbowDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Gail FernandesMerck & Co, Inc, Rahway, New Jersey.
J Sonya HawEmory Global Diabetes Research Center, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Megha K ShahEmory Global Diabetes Research Center, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Swapnil RajpathakMerck & Co, Inc, Rahway, New Jersey.
K M Venkat NarayanEmory Global Diabetes Research Center, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
Mohammed K AliEmory Global Diabetes Research Center, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.

Funding

Translational Research Core - Engagement and Behavior ChangeP30DK111024 · NIDDK · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Mohammed Kumail Ali · 2016 to 2026
$13.4M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK111024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Consistent medication use is critical for diabetes management. Population surveillance of consistency of medication use may identify opportunities to improve diabetes care. Objective: To evaluate trends in longitudinal use of glucose-, blood pressure-, and lipid-lowering medications by adults with diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This serial cross-sectional study assessed trends in longitudinal use of glucose-, blood pressure-, and lipid-lowering medications by adults with diagnosed diabetes participating in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), which allows serial cross-sections and 2-year longitudinal follow-up, between the 2005 to 2006 panel and 2018 to 2019 panel. Population-weighted, nationally representative estimates for the US were reported. Included individuals were adult MEPS participants with diagnosed diabetes during both years (ie, during 2005 and 2006 or during 2018 and 2019) who participated in all survey rounds. Data were analyzed from August 2021 to November 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Longitudinal use over the 2 years was categorized as continued use (at least 1 fill per year), no use, inconsistent use, and new use by medication type (glucose-, blood pressure-, and lipid-lowering medications). New medications were defined as prescription fills for a medication type first prescribed and filled in year 2 of MEPS participation. Results: A total of 15 237 participants with diabetes (7222 individuals aged 45-64 years [47.4%]; 8258 [54.2%] female participants; 3851 Latino [25.3%]; 3619 non-Latino Black (23.8%), and 6487 non-Latino White [42.6%]) were included in the analytical sample. A mean of 19.5% (95% CI, 18.6%-20.3%), 17.1% (95% CI, 16.2%-18.1%), and 43.3% (95% CI, 42.2%-44.3%) of participants did not maintain continuity in use of glucose-, blood pressure-, or lipid-lowering medications, respectively, during both years of follow-up. The proportion of participants who continued use of glucose-lowering medication in both years trended down from 84.5% (95% CI, 81.8%-87.3%) in 2005 to 2006 to 77.4% (95% CI, 74.8%-80.1%) in 2018 to 2019; this decrease coincided with rate increases in inconsistent use (3.3% [95% CI, 1.9%-4.7%] in 2005-2006 to 7.1% [95% CI, 5.6%-8.6%] in 2018-2019) and no use (8.1% [95% CI, 6.0%-10.1%] in 2005-2006 to 12.9% [95% CI, 10.9%-14.9%] in 2018-2019). Inconsistent use of blood pressure-lowering medications trended upward from 3.9% (95% CI, 1.8%-6.0%) in 2005 to 2006 to 9.0% (95% CI, 7.0%-11.0%) in 2016 to 2017. Inconsistent use of lipid-lowering medication trended up to a high of 9.9% (95% CI, 7.0%-12.7%) in 2017 to 2018. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that a mean of 19.5% of participants did not maintain continuity in use of glucose-lowering medication, with recent decreases, while a mean of 17.1% and 43.2% of participants did not maintain continuity of use of blood pressure- or lipid-lowering medications, respectively.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDrug PrescriptionsFemaleHumansLipidsMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesLipids

Identifiers

PMID36716032
PMCPMC9887500

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.