ArticleBMC public health2025
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic shelter in place on glycemic control, blood pressure control, and body mass index among diabetic patients at Kaiser Permanente Northern California: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Primary Care Utilisation: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
introductionRegional shelter-in-place (SiP) mandates had a substantial impact on physical health and access to care. The impact of SiP on chronic disease management, specifically diabetes mellitus, is unknown. We sought to quantify the impact of California's 2020 SiP order on various health parameters in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) diabetic population.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 168,621 diabetic patients, stratified by pre-pandemic HbA1c level. Our primary outcome was the difference in HbA1c, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) comparing the pre- (September 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020) to post-SiP period (June 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020). Our secondary endpoints included use of insulin or oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) during the post-SiP period and change in body mass index (BMI). This study utilized a paired t-test and chi-squared testing in order to assess for statistically significant differences in pre- versus post-SiP values.
resultsPatients in this cohort were 52.29% male with 37.68% White, 22.35% Hispanic, 9.30% Black and 23.54% Asian and a mean age of 63 years. In this cohort, 44.02% of patients had a HbA1c < 7%, while 29.17%, 13.67%, 6.34% and 6.81% had an HbA1c of 7-7.9%, 8-8.9%, 9-9.9% and ≥ 10%, respectively (range 4.10 to 19.50%). Mean HbA1c, SBP, and DBP increased significantly across all groups; OHA use and insulin utilization also increased overall. Patients with lower pre-SiP HbA1c demonstrated larger increases in HbA1c and OHA utilization, while patients with higher pre-SiP HbA1c demonstrated increased rates of insulin initiation and decreases in their post-SiP HbA1c. Notably, mean BMI decreased in every HbA1c subgroup. Due to the large sample size, all p-values were < 0.0001.
conclusionsAmong the KPNC diabetic population, several metrics for diabetes health management were significantly worsened after California's SiP. However, diabetic patients with the highest HbA1c values showed clinically significant improvement in their HbA1c, indicating a differential effect of the SiP on diabetes management. Our study helps identify higher-risk diabetic patients who require more intensive monitoring in the setting of the recent pandemic and highlights the importance of considering long-term implications of policy decisions on diabetes care.
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.