Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42895748›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2026

A Conversation Tool to Enhance Care for People With Type 2 Diabetes: The QBSafe Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Kasia J Lipska, Megan E Branda, Anne W Camp, Melissa Montosa, Rozalina G McCoy, Victor V Montori, Felipe Larios, Victor M Montori

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05553912 (QBSafe), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05553912 nacompletednot on this map

QBSafe: a Randomized Trial of a Novel Intervention to Improve Care for People Living With Type 2 Diabetes.

TypeinterventionalSponsorYale UniversityRan2022 to 2025Enrolled154ConditionsType2Diabetes, DiabetesArmsQBSafe
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Kasia J LipskaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Section of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Megan E BrandaDivision of Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Anne W CampFair Haven Community Health Center, New Haven, Connecticut.
Melissa MontosaFair Haven Community Health Center, New Haven, Connecticut.
Rozalina G McCoyDivision of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore.
Victor V MontoriKnowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Division of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Felipe LariosKnowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Division of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Victor M MontoriKnowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Division of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Effective interventions are needed to support the cocreation of diabetes care plans that are sensible, desirable, and feasible for the people living with diabetes (ie, care that fits). Objective: To investigate whether an agenda-setting kit (ASK) added to usual primary care improves fit of care and glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-center, clinician-level cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted from February 16, 2023, to July 26, 2024, with a 6-month follow-up, at a federally qualified health center in New Haven, Connecticut. Eligible clinicians were primary care physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants who prescribed medication to treat patients with T2D. Eligible patients were English- or Spanish-speaking adults aged 18 years or older with T2D and hemoglobin (Hb) A1c level greater than 8%. Patients were excluded if their clinician determined that an HbA1c level 8% or lower was inconsistent with goals of care. Data were analyzed from November 7, 2024, to August 13, 2026. Intervention: Clinicians were randomized 1:1 to the ASK plus usual primary care group (intervention group) or usual primary care only (control group). The ASK intervention consisted of 14 conversation cards about life with diabetes and its treatment. Prior to the clinical encounter, patients were asked to select 0 to 3 cards they wanted to prioritize for discussion. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the 6-month change from baseline in illness intrusiveness measured with the Illness Intrusiveness Ratings Scale (IIRS; range: 13-91, with higher scores indicating greater intrusiveness) and HbA1c level. Secondary outcomes included changes in treatment burden measured with the Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ; range: 0-150, with higher scores indicating greater burden), diabetes distress measured with the 17-Item Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS-17; scores: indicate little or no distress [<2.0], moderate distress [2.0-2.9], and high distress [≥3.0]), and visit satisfaction. Results: Eleven clinicians (6 [54.5%] female) were included in the trial along with 143 of their patients. The mean (SD) patient age was 56 (12) years; 87 participants (60.8%) were female and 88 (61.5%) reported Spanish as their primary language. Six-month survey data were available for 65 of 74 patients (87.8%) in the intervention group and 58 of 69 (84.0%) in the control group; data on HbA1c level were available for 71 (95.9%) and 65 (94.2%), respectively. At 6 months, mean (SD) IIRS scores were 32.1 (15.1) and 37.1 (18.7) in the intervention and control groups (adjusted mean difference, -3.9; 95% CI, -10.4 to 2.6). The mean (SD) HbA1c levels were 8.8% (1.8) in the intervention group and 9.1% (1.8) in the control group (adjusted mean difference, -0.2%; 95% CI, -0.9% to 0.5%). Mean (SD) TBQ scores in the intervention and control groups were 41.2 (44.8) and 46.8 (44.4) (adjusted mean difference, 1.0; 95% CI, -16.6 to 18.6), and mean (SD) DDS-17 scores were 2.0 (1.0) and 2.3 (1.0) (adjusted mean difference, -0.1; 95% CI, -0.4 to 0.2). Clinician-reported satisfaction was greater in the intervention group; patient satisfaction did not differ between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial of adults with T2D, use of the ASK with usual primary care was associated with greater clinician satisfaction but not with improvements in patients' fit of care or glycemic control over 6 months. Larger studies should evaluate interventions that not only identify patients' priorities and treatment burdens but also better support clinicians in addressing them. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05553912.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Adherence InterventionsAdultAgedConnecticutFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareGlycated Hemoglobin

Identifiers

PMID42895748
PMCPMC13681207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.