ArticleThe American journal of managed care2023
Diabetes, gaps in care coordination, and preventable adverse events.
Article in The American journal of managed care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effective Interventions for Homebound Older Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review.Current diabetes reports · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and Safety of Tildrakizumab for Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis with Diabetes: Pooled Subgroup Analysis of reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Filling Diabetes Medications Through VA or Medicare, or Both: Factors in Decision Making, Challenges, and Informational Needs.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular-Endocrine-Metabolic Medicine: Proposing a New Clinical Sub-Specialty Amid the Cardiometabolic Pandemic.Biomolecules · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the frequency of self-reported gaps in care coordination and self-reported preventable adverse events among adults with vs without diabetes. STUDY
designCross-sectional analysis of REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study participants 65 years and older who completed a survey on health care experiences in 2017-2018 (N = 5634).
methodsWe analyzed the association of diabetes with self-reported gaps in care coordination and with preventable adverse events. Gaps in care coordination were assessed using 8 validated questions. Four self-reported adverse events were studied (drug-drug interactions, repeat medical tests, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations). Respondents were asked if they thought these events could have been prevented with better communication among providers.
resultsOverall, 1724 (30.6%) participants had diabetes. Among participants with and without diabetes, 39.3% and 40.7%, respectively, reported any gap in care coordination. The adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) for any gap in care coordination for participants with vs without diabetes was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.89-1.06). Any preventable adverse event was reported by 12.9% and 8.7% of participants with and without diabetes, respectively. The aPR for any preventable adverse event for participants with vs without diabetes was 1.22 (95% CI, 1.00-1.49). Among participants with and without diabetes, the aPRs for any preventable adverse event associated with any gap in care coordination were 1.53 (95% CI, 1.15-2.04) and 1.50 (95% CI, 1.21-1.88), respectively (P comparing aPRs = .922).
conclusionsInterventions to improve quality of care for patients with diabetes could incorporate patient-reported gaps in care coordination to aid in preventing adverse events.
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.