ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Data-Driven Commissioning to Reduce Type 2 Diabetes Related Health Disparities in The Netherlands: Using Key Informant Group Interviews.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealth disparities in individuals with type 2 diabetes result in an enormous amount of healthcare usage and are difficult to address. We examine how Dutch private, not-for profit health insurers, responsible for accessibility of care, use their claims data in the commissioning process to reduce health disparities.
objectiveTo identify factors influencing the possibility to reduce health disparities in commissioning based on data-driven insights.
methodsKey informant group interview data was analyzed using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach following the 6SQIuD framework to identify factors, their relationships, and potential for change, with results validated using a saturation, member and expert check.
resultsFrom the 79 factors found, three were data capability-related and 76 were decision context-related. Fifteen main factors were found on socio-cultural, system, organizational and interpersonal levels. The factors in the decision context can be divided into the themes equality, quality and organizational sustainability.
conclusionsThis study explored the factors influencing commissioners' ability to reduce disparities and the role of data. Interestingly, no main factors related to data capabilities were identified. Three paradoxes were seen after interpreting our data: equal access leads to unfavorable unequal outcomes; a focus on evidence-based healthcare interventions limits effectiveness in reducing health disparities; and conservative organizational behavior threatens long-term viability. Further policy analyses are needed to better understand which systemic and organizational conditions facilitate commissioners in addressing health disparities.
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.