SynthesisBMJ medicine2026
Values, preferences, and treatment burden for initiation of GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT-2 inhibitors, tirzepatide, and finerenone in adults with type 2 diabetes: systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ medicine, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To summarise existing evidence regarding the values, preferences, and perceived treatment burden of adults with type 2 diabetes when considering initiation of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i), finerenone, or tirzepatide. Design: Systematic review. Data sources: Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from database inception to 7 January 2025 (updating a previous systematic review that captured literature up to 23 May 2020). Eligibility criteria: Quantitative or qualitative studies were included if they reported patient reported values, preferences, or treatment burden among adults with type 2 diabetes and compared initiation of GLP-1 RA, SGLT-2i, tirzepatide, or finerenone with each other or with other glucose-lowering treatments. Data extraction and synthesis: Paired reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. Findings were synthesised narratively. Results: Thirty four studies (15 656 patients) were included, 17 of which were new since the previous 2021 review (8360 patients). Of the newly included studies, 10 evaluated GLP-1 RA, seven evaluated SGLT-2i, and one evaluated tirzepatide; no studies evaluated finerenone (because several studies compared multiple drug classes, these categories are not mutually exclusive). Across comparisons, patients consistently reported glycaemic efficacy, cardiovascular risk reduction, and simplicity of administration as their priorities. Oral once-daily regimens and once-weekly injectable treatments with easy-to-use devices were generally preferred. Weight loss was valued but was typically secondary to glycaemic and cardiovascular benefits. SGLT-2i and GLP-1 RA were often preferred over dipeptidyl peptidase 4-inhibitors (DPP-4i), thiazolidinediones, and insulins, but no consistent preference emerged for SGLT-2i over GLP-1 RA. Tirzepatide was favoured over semaglutide in a single study, largely due to greater haemoglobin A Conclusion: Adults with type 2 diabetes prioritise treatment effectiveness and convenience among glucose-lowering treatments. Current evidence does not support a clear preference between SGLT-2i and GLP-1 RA, and data for finerenone are absent. These findings underscore the importance of shared decision making informed by individual patient priorities. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023429170.
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.