ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Testing an Automated Approach to Identify Variation in Outcomes among Children with Type 1 Diabetes across Multiple Sites.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Common data models and data standards for tabular health data: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Efficient methods to obtain and benchmark national data are needed to improve comparative quality assessment for children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). PCORnet is a network of clinical data research networks whose infrastructure includes standardization to a Common Data Model (CDM) incorporating electronic health record (EHR)-derived data across multiple clinical institutions. The study aimed to determine the feasibility of the automated use of EHR data to assess comparative quality for T1D. Methods: In two PCORnet networks, PEDSnet and OneFlorida, the study assessed measures of glycemic control, diabetic ketoacidosis admissions, and clinic visits in 2016-2018 among youth 0-20 years of age. The study team developed measure EHR-based specifications, identified institution-specific rates using data stored in the CDM, and assessed agreement with manual chart review. Results: Among 9,740 youth with T1D across 12 institutions, one quarter (26%) had two or more measures of A1c greater than 9% annually (min 5%, max 47%). The median A1c was 8.5% (min site 7.9, max site 10.2). Overall, 4% were hospitalized for diabetic ketoacidosis (min 2%, max 8%). The predictive value of the PCORnet CDM was Conclusions: Using EHR-derived data to assess comparative quality for T1D is a valid, efficient, and reliable data collection tool for measuring T1D care and outcomes. Wide variations across institutions were observed, and even the best-performing institutions often failed to achieve the American Diabetes Association HbA1C goals (<7.5%).
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.