Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 494

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 81 of the 81 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interventions to improve the management of diabetes mellitus in primary care, outpatient and community settings

Open access
Renders, Carry Mira, Valk, Gerlof D, Griffin, Simon J, Wagner, Edward, van Eijk, Jacques ThM, Assendelft, Willem JJ·2000·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a common chronic disease that is increasingly managed in primary care. Different systems have been proposed to manage diabetes care. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of different interventions, targeted at health professionals or the structure in which they deliver care, on the management of patients with diabetes in primary care, outpatient and community settings. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 4 1999), MEDLINE (1966-1999), EMBASE (1980-1999), Cinahl (1982-1999), and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITS) analyses of professional, financial and organisational strategies aimed at improving care for people with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes. The participants were health care professionals, including physicians, nurses and pharmacists. The outcomes included objectively measured health professional performance or patient outcomes, and self-report measures with known validity and reliability. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. MAIN RESULTS: Forty-one studies were included involving more than 200 practices and 48,000 patients. Twenty-seven studies were RCTs, 12 were CBAs, and two were ITS. The studies were heterogeneous in terms of interventions, participants, settings and outcomes. The methodological quality of the studies was often poor. In all studies the intervention strategy was multifaceted. In 12 studies the interventions were targeted at health professionals, in nine they were targeted at the organisation of care, and 20 studies targeted both. In 15 studies patient education was added to the professional and organisational interventions. A combination of professional interventions improved process outcomes. The effect on patient outcomes remained less clear as these were rarely assessed. Arrangements for follow-up (organisational intervention) also showed a favourable effect on process outcomes. Multiple interventions in which patient education was added or in which the role of the nurse was enhanced also reported favourable effects on patients' health outcomes. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Multifaceted professional interventions can enhance the performance of health professionals in managing patients with diabetes. Organisational interventions that improve regular prompted recall and review of patients (central computerised tracking systems or nurses who regularly contact the patient) can also improve diabetes management. The addition of patient-oriented interventions can lead to improved patient health outcomes. Nurses can play an important role in patient-oriented interventions, through patient education or facilitating adherence to treatment.

Overview

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 · 10.1002/14651858.cd001481

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 81 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Hartmann, 1995, Structured public health quality circle on the topic of diabetes management in general practice, Zeitschrift fur Fortbildung, 89, 415
  2. Harrower, 1995, Improvement in psychological well-being in new NIDDMs. DSN versus medical initial assessment, Pract Diab Int, 12, 120, 10.1002/pdi.1960120307 · doi:10.1002/pdi.1960120307
  3. Ronnemaa, 1997, Evaluation of the impact of podiatrist care in the primary prevention of foot problems in diabetic subjects, Diabetes Care, 20, 1833, 10.2337/diacare.20.12.1833 · doi:10.2337/diacare.20.12.1833
  4. Williams, 1990, A three-year evaluation of the quality of diabetes care in the Norwich community care scheme, Diabetic Medicine, 7, 74, 10.1111/j.1464-5491.1990.tb01312.x · doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.1990.tb01312.x
  5. Bero L Deane K Eccles M Grimshaw J Gruen RL Mayhew A Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2008 Chichester Wiley-Blackwell
  6. Greenhalgh, 1997, Randomised controlled trials, 41
  7. Griffin, 1997, The management of diabetes by general practitioners and shared care
  8. Mazze, 1995, Intensified diabetes management: lessons from the diabetes control and complications trial, International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology of Therapeutics, 33, 43
  9. Wood, 1990, A review of diabetes care initiatives in primary care settings, Health Trends, 22, 39

Cited by

See all 494

Metadata

Authors
Renders, C. M., Valk, G. D., Griffin, S. J., Wagner, E., van Eijk, J. T., & Assendelft, W. J.
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-10-23
Volume
2010
Issue
1
Pages
CD001481-CD001481
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W1594583733
Cited by
494
References
81
FWCI
4.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Interventions to improve the management of diabetes mellitus in primary care, outpatient and community settings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd001481
The paper
Renders, C. M., Valk, G. D., Griffin, S. J., Wagner, E., van Eijk, J. T., & Assendelft, W. J. (2000). Interventions to improve the management of diabetes mellitus in primary care, outpatient and community settings. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd001481

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.