Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 301

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomised controlled trial of structured personal care of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Open access
Olivarius, Niels de Fine, Beck-Nielsen, Henning, Andreasen, Anne Helms, Hørder, Mogens, Pedersen, Poul A·2001·BMJ
DOI 10.1136/bmj.323.7319.970
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective: To assess the effect of a multifaceted intervention directed at general practitioners on six year mortality, morbidity, and risk factors of patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Design: Pragmatic, open, controlled trial with randomisation of practices to structured personal care or routine care; analysis after 6 years. Setting: 311 Danish practices with 474 general practitioners (243 in intervention group and 231 in comparison group). Participants: 874 (90.1%) of 970 patients aged ≥40 years who had diabetes diagnosed in 1989-91 and survived until six year follow up. Intervention: Regular follow up and individualised goal setting supported by prompting of doctors, clinical guidelines, feedback, and continuing medical education. Main outcome measures: Predefined clinical non-fatal outcomes, overall mortality, risk factors, and weight. Results: Predefined non-fatal outcomes and mortality were the same in both groups. The following risk factor levels were lower for intervention patients than for comparison patients (median values): fasting plasma glucose concentration (7.9 v 8.7 mmol/l, P=0.0007), glycated haemoglobin (8.5% v 9.0%, P<0.0001; reference range 5.4-7.4%), systolic blood pressure (145 v 150 mm Hg, P=0.0004), and cholesterol concentration (6.0 v 6.1 mmol/l, P=0.029, adjusted for baseline concentration). Both groups had lost weight since diagnosis (2.6 v 2.0 kg). Metformin was the only drug used more frequently in the intervention group (24% (110/459) v 15% (61/415)).Intervention doctors arranged more follow up consultations, referred fewer patients to diabetes clinics, and set more optimistic goals. Conclusions: In primary care, individualised goals with educational and surveillance support may for at least six years bring risk factors of patients with type 2 diabetes to a level that has been shown to reduce diabetic complications but without weight gain. What is already known on this topic: Evidence is increasing that control of hyperglycaemia, hypertension, and dyslipidaemia may postpone the development of diabetic complications in patients with type 2 diabetes Maintaining good control over a long period can be difficult What this study adds: Structured individualised personal care with educational and surveillance support for general practitioners reduced levels of risk factors in type 2 diabetic patients after six years Risk factors were reduced to a level that has been shown to have a beneficial effect on diabetic complications Participants also showed modest weight loss

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 · 10.1136/bmj.323.7319.970

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Olivarius, N. D. F., Beck-Nielsen, H., Andreasen, A. H., Hørder, M., & Pedersen, P. A.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2001-10-27
Volume
323
Issue
7319
Pages
970
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
DOI
10.1136/bmj.323.7319.970
OpenAlex
W2087533214
Cited by
301
References
4
FWCI
10.37
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

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.