ArticleBMJ open2026
Association between medication adherence and glycaemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes in Luzhou: a retrospective cohort study (2018-2023).
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the longitudinal association between medication adherence and glycaemic control among patients with Type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Luzhou City, identify modifiable factors and provide actionable evidence to inform targeted diabetes management strategies.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingWestern China.
participantsData from 30 508 T2D patients in the Luzhou City Health Information Management System (2018-2023). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure: glycaemic control rate. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: medication adherence, hypertension comorbidity and lifestyle factors.
resultsPatients with consistent adherence achieved significantly higher glycaemic control rates (39.6%, 95% CI 38.8% to 40.4%) compared with intermittent adherents (20.8%, 95% CI 19.9% to 21.7%, p<0.001). Poor adherence to medical advice is a major barrier to effective blood glucose control, particularly among intermittent adherents, reducing their success rate by 29.4% (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=0.706, 95% CI 0.643 to 0.774). Conversely, male gender (aOR=0.879, 95% CI 0.813 to 0.950) and higher educational attainment (aOR=1.004, 95% CI 1.002 to 1.007) were positively associated with glycaemic control. Additionally, temporary residence status provided a marginal benefit (aOR=1.064, 95% CI 1.013 to 1.117), suggesting potential disparities in access to medical resources between urban and rural areas.
conclusionsWhile medication adherence remains fundamental for glycaemic control, its association with glycaemic control varied according to hypertension comorbidity and lifestyle factors. These findings advocate for integrated care models that simultaneously address cardiovascular risk factors and promote behavioural modifications, particularly in resource-constrained settings experiencing rapid epidemiological transitions.
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.