Cited by 37Diabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and Research

Effects of a Technology-Assisted Integrated Diabetes Care Program on Cardiometabolic Risk Factors Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in the Asia-Pacific Region: The JADE Program Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Lim, Lee-Ling, Lau, Eric S. H., Fu, Amy W. C., Ray, Subir, Hung, Yi-Jen, Tan, Alexander T. B., Chamnan, Parinya, Sheu, Wayne H. H. +17 more·2021·JAMA Network Open

Abstract

Importance: Many health care systems lack the efficiency, preparedness, or resources needed to address the increasing number of patients with type 2 diabetes, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Objective: To examine the effects of a quality improvement intervention comprising information and communications technology and contact with nonphysician personnel on the care and cardiometabolic risk factors of patients with type 2 diabetes in 8 Asia-Pacific countries. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 12-month multinational open-label randomized clinical trial was conducted from June 28, 2012, to April 28, 2016, at 50 primary care or hospital-based diabetes centers in 8 Asia-Pacific countries (India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam). Six countries were low and middle income, and 2 countries were high income. The study was conducted in 2 phases; phase 1 enrolled 7537 participants, and phase 2 enrolled 13 297 participants. Participants in both phases were randomized on a 1:1 ratio to intervention or control groups. Data were analyzed by intention to treat and per protocol from July 3, 2019, to July 21, 2020. Interventions: In both phases, the intervention group received 3 care components: a nurse-led Joint Asia Diabetes Evaluation (JADE) technology-guided structured evaluation, automated personalized reports to encourage patient empowerment, and 2 or more telephone or face-to-face contacts by nurses to increase patient engagement. In phase 1, the control group received the JADE technology-guided structured evaluation and automated personalized reports. In phase 2, the control group received the JADE technology-guided structured evaluation only. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the incidence of a composite of diabetes-associated end points, including cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, visual impairment or eye surgery, lower extremity amputation or foot ulcers requiring hospitalization, all-site cancers, and death. The secondary outcomes were the attainment of 2 or more primary diabetes-associated targets (glycated hemoglobin A1c <7.0%, blood pressure <130/80 mm Hg, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL) and/or 2 or more key performance indices (reduction in glycated hemoglobin A1c≥0.5%, reduction in systolic blood pressure ≥5 mm Hg, reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥19 mg/dL, and reduction in body weight ≥3.0%). Results: A total of 20 834 patients with type 2 diabetes were randomized in phases 1 and 2. In phase 1, 7537 participants (mean [SD] age, 60.0 [11.3] years; 3914 men [51.9%]; 4855 patients [64.4%] from low- and middle-income countries) were randomized, with 3732 patients allocated to the intervention group and 3805 patients allocated to the control group. In phase 2, 13 297 participants (mean [SD] age, 54.0 [11.1] years; 7754 men [58.3%]; 13 297 patients [100%] from low- and middle-income countries) were randomized, with 6645 patients allocated to the intervention group and 6652 patients allocated to the control group. In phase 1, compared with the control group, the intervention group had a similar risk of experiencing any of the primary outcomes (odds ratio [OR], 0.94; 95% CI, 0.74-1.21) but had an increased likelihood of attaining 2 or more primary targets (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.21-1.49) and 2 or more key performance indices (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.04-1.34). In phase 2, the intervention group also had a similar risk of experiencing any of the primary outcomes (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.83-1.25) and had a greater likelihood of attaining 2 or more primary targets (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.14-1.37) and 2 or more key performance indices (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.33-1.68) compared with the control group. For attainment of 2 or more primary targets, larger effects were observed among patients in low- and middle-income countries (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.29-1.74) compared with high-income countries (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.03-1.39) (P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: In this 12-month clinical trial, the use of information and communications technology and nurses to empower and engage patients did not change the number of clinical events but did reduce cardiometabolic risk factors among patients with type 2 diabetes, especially those in low- and middle-income countries in the Asia-Pacific region. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01631084.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.7557

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Among the nine technology-assisted studies, physical activity was the most commonly targeted behavior (67%, 6/9 studies), followed by medication adherence (44%, 4/9), dietary behaviors (33%, 3/9), and self-monitoring of blood glucose (22%, 2/9).

    “Among the nine technology-assisted studies, physical activity was the most commonly targeted behavior (67%, 6/9 studies), followed by medication adherence (44%, 4/9), dietary behaviors (33%, 3/9), and self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) (22%, 2/9) [10,20,23], [25,26,30,31,34,37].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lim, L.-L., Lau, E. S. H., Fu, A. W. C., Ray, S., Hung, Y.-J., Tan, A. T. B., Chamnan, P., Sheu, W. H. H., Chawla, M. S., Chia, Y.-C., Chuang, L.-M., Nguyen, D.-C., Sosale, A., Saboo, B. D., Phadke, U., Kesavadev, J., Goh, S.-Y., Gera, N., Huyen Vu, T. T., Ma, R. C. W., Lau, V., Luk, A. O. Y., Kong, A. P. S., Chan, J. C. N., & Asia-Pacific JADE Study Group
Affiliations
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • Asia Diabetes Foundation (CN)
  • Relief Polyclinic, Hoogly, India
  • Tri-Service General Hospital (TW)
  • University of Malaya (MY)
  • Sappasithiprasong Hospital (TH)
  • Taichung Veterans General Hospital (TW)
  • Lina Diabetes Care Centre, Mumbai, India
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
  • National Taiwan University Hospital (TW)
  • Thong Nhat Hospital (VN)
  • Diacon Hospital (IN)
  • Dia Care–Diabetes Care and Hormone Clinic, Gujarat, India
  • Instride, Pune, India
  • Jothydev's Diabetes and Research Center (IN)
  • Singapore General Hospital (SG)
  • Max Healthcare (IN)
  • Department of Internal Medicine, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam
  • Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
Corresponding author
Chan, Juliana C. N.
Venue
JAMA Network Open
Published
2021-04-30
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
e217557
ISSN
2574-3805 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3157371898
Cited by
37
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10
FWCI
4.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JAMA Network Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, integrated diabetes care, information and communication technologies, nurse-led care, cardiometabolic risk factors, HbA1c, blood pressure, LDL cholesterol, cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, diabetes complications, patient empowerment, low- and middle-income countries, Asia-Pacific region, quality improvement intervention, primary care
MeSH terms
Self-Management, Treatment Adherence and Compliance, Cardiometabolic Risk Factors, Aged, Amputation, Surgical, Asia, Southeastern, Blood Pressure, Cardiovascular Diseases, Developing Countries, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diabetic Nephropathies, Diabetic Retinopathy, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, India, Cholesterol, LDL, Male, Middle Aged, Mortality, Neoplasms, Patient Participation, Taiwan, Technology, Diabetic Foot, Risk Assessment, Evidence-Based Medicine, Disease Management, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Renal Insufficiency, Chronic, Quality Improvement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review