CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 446Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Meta-analysis of effects of intensive blood-glucose control on late complications of type I diabetes*1

WANG, P·1993·The Lancet
DOI 10.1016/0140-6736(93)90816-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Tight blood glucose control has been speculated to reduce late complications in insulin-dependent diabetics but results from individual studies have been inconsistent. We have done a meta-analysis of sixteen randomised trials of intensive therapy to estimate its impact on the progression of diabetic retinopathy and nephropathy and the risks of severe side-effects. In the intensive therapy group, the risk of retinopathy progression was insignificantly higher after 6-12 months of intensive control (odds ratio [OR] 2.11). After more than two years of intensive therapy the risk of retinopathy progression was lower (OR 0.49 [95% confidence interval 0.28-0.85], p = 0.011). The risk of nephropathy progression was also decreased significantly (OR 0.34 [0.20-0.58], p < 0.001). The incidence of severe hypoglycaemia increased by 9.1 episodes per 100 person-years (95% Cl -1.4 to +19.6) in the intensively treated patients. The incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis increased by 12.6 episodes per 100 person-years (95% Cl, 8.7-16.5) in the patients on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Long-term intensive blood glucose control significantly reduces the risk of diabetic retinopathy and nephropathy progression but long-term continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion was associated with an increased incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis, and intensive therapy may cause more severe hypoglycaemic reactions.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0140-6736(93)90816-y

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 24 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 446

Related

Metadata

Authors
WANG, P.
Affiliations
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
WANG, P
ORCID
WANG, P
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1993-05
Volume
341
Issue
8856
Pages
1306-1309
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
DOI
10.1016/0140-6736(93)90816-y
OpenAlex
W1995937915
Cited by
446
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 13
FWCI
9.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • The Lancet (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01 HS-05936)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
tight glycemic control, type 1 diabetes, diabetic retinopathy progression, diabetic nephropathy progression, hypoglycemia, diabetic ketoacidosis, insulin pump therapy, late complications, insulin therapy
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Diabetic Nephropathies, Diabetic Retinopathy, Humans, Hypoglycemia, Risk Factors, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Diabetic Ketoacidosis

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