ArticleMedicine2026
Effect of antidiabetic medication adherence on risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular diseases in type 2 diabetes patients: Impact of antidiabetic adherence on cardiovascular disease.
Article in Medicine, 2026. 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.
- Effect of the initial combination approach vs initial monotherapy approach on 1-year trajectories of adherence in drug-naive patients with type 2 diabetes.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This retrospective cohort study aims to examine the association between adherence to thiazolidinedione (TZD) therapy and the risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, compared with utilization of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and sulfonylureas (SUs), using real-world national data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service (2009-2018). Two matched cohorts were established: TZDs versus DPP-4 inhibitors (n = 7875) and TZDs versus SUs (n = 5837). Adherence was measured using the proportion of days covered during the first year, with high adherence defined as proportion of days covered ≥0.8. Outcomes included myocardial infarction, stroke, CV death, hospitalization for heart failure, major adverse CV events, and all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards models were applied using intention-to-treat and adherence-stratified analyses. At 12 months, DPP-4 inhibitor users demonstrated higher adherence and persistence compared to the TZD users, whereas adherence was comparable between TZD and SU users. In cohort 1, TZD therapy was associated with increased risks of stroke (hazard ratio [HR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.23) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.10, 95% CI: 1.01-1.20) compared with DPP-4 inhibitors. In cohort 2, TZDs were associated with lower risks of myocardial infarction (HR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.99), major adverse CV events (HR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.76-0.95), hospitalization for heart failure (HR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.75-1.00), and all-cause mortality (HR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.74-0.93) compared with SUs. High adherence to TZDs was consistently associated with more favorable CV and survival outcomes, in comparison to SUs. In this nationwide cohort, TZD therapy, especially with high adherence, reduced CV risk and mortality compared with SUs and DPP-4 inhibitors, highlighting the importance of sustained TZD adherence for optimal long-term outcomes in routine clinical practice.
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.