ArticlePreventive medicine reports2026
Current attitudes of primary care providers toward albuminuria testing in patients with diabetes in the United States.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 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
Objective: To evaluate primary care providers' attitudes and practices regarding albuminuria testing in patients with type 2 diabetes in the United States. Methods: Using a web-based opt-in panel of providers (Porter Novelli DocStyles survey, Fall 2024), we conducted a cross-sectional study to assess attitudes toward albuminuria testing, adherence to guidelines, and reported barriers. Associations were estimated using multivariable Poisson regression. Results: Among 1236 providers who see at least one patient with diabetes weekly, 90.0% supported albuminuria testing and 83.3% agreed that annual testing helps with diabetes prognosis. Adherence to recommended urine testing-defined as correct test type, concurrent urine creatinine measurement, and recommended testing frequency-ranged from 52% to 68%. Lower adherence was associated with inpatient practice, being a nurse practitioner or physician assistant, lack of a urinalysis reminder system, perceived guideline ambiguity or time constraints, and lower diabetes patient volume. Conclusions: Despite most providers supporting urine testing for patients with diabetes, significant gaps between knowledge and practice were identified. Clinical decision support tools and clearer recommendations may help close the gaps between the guideline recommendations and 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.