CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 310Diabetes Management and ResearchHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of Prior Intensive Insulin Therapy on Cardiac Autonomic Nervous System Function in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Study (DCCT/EDIC)

Open access
Pop-Busui, Rodica, Low, Phillip A., Waberski, Barbara H., Martin, Catherine L., Albers, James W., Feldman, Eva L., Sommer, Catherine, Cleary, Patricia A., Lachin, John M., Herman, William H.·2009·Circulation
DOI 10.1161/circulationaha.108.837369PMC PMC2757005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background— The Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study, a prospective observational follow-up of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) cohort, reported persistent benefit of prior intensive therapy on retinopathy and nephropathy in type 1 diabetes mellitus. We evaluated the effects of prior intensive insulin therapy on the prevalence and incidence of cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) in former DCCT intensive and conventional therapy subjects 13 to 14 years after DCCT closeout. Methods and Results— DCCT autonomic measures (R-R variation with paced breathing, Valsalva ratio, postural blood pressure changes, and autonomic symptoms) were repeated in 1226 EDIC subjects in EDIC year 13/14. Logistic regression models were used to calculate the odds of incident CAN by DCCT treatment group after adjustment for DCCT baseline covariates, duration in the DCCT, and quantitative autonomic measures at DCCT closeout. In EDIC year 13/14, the prevalence of CAN using the DCCT composite definition was significantly lower in the former intensive group versus the former conventional group (28.9% versus 35.2%; P =0.018). Adjusted R-R variation was significantly greater in the former DCCT intensive versus the former conventional group (29.9 versus 25.9; P <0.001). Prior DCCT intensive therapy reduced the risks of incident CAN by 31% (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.51 to 0.93) and of incident abnormal R-R variation by 30% (odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.51 to 0.96) in EDIC year 13/14. Conclusions— Although CAN prevalence increased in both groups, the incidence was significantly lower in the former intensive group compared with the former conventional group. The benefits of former intensive therapy extend to measures of CAN up to 14 years after DCCT closeout.

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 · 10.1161/circulationaha.108.837369

Cites

29 of 29 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

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?

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 29 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Gelber DA, Pfeifer M, Schumer M. Reliability and comparison of methods to calculate heart rate variability. Diabetes. 1995; 44: 30A. Abstract.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Pop-Busui, R., Low, P. A., Waberski, B. H., Martin, C. L., Albers, J. W., Feldman, E. L., Sommer, C., Cleary, P. A., Lachin, J. M., & Herman, W. H.
Affiliations
  • From the University of Michigan, Departments of Internal Medicine, Division of Metabolism, Endocrinology, Diabetes (R.P.-B., C.L.M., W.H.H.), and Neurology (J.W.A., E.L.F.), Ann Arbor; Mayo Clinic, Department of Neurology, Rochester, Minn (P.A.L., C.S.); and The Biostatistics Center, George Washington University, Rockville, Md (B.H.W., P.A.C., J.M.L.).
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
ORCID
Venue
Circulation
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2009-06-09
Volume
119
Issue
22
Pages
2886-2893
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
DOI
10.1161/circulationaha.108.837369
PMC
PMC2757005
OpenAlex
W2088134829
Cited by
310
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 15
FWCI
13.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Circulation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (n01dk062204-003)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (N01 DK062204, R01DK062218)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
type 1 diabetes, cardiac autonomic neuropathy, intensive insulin therapy, conventional insulin therapy, Diabetes Control and Complications Trial, Valsalva ratio, postural blood pressure, autonomic function, long-term glycemic control
MeSH terms
Adult, Autonomic Nervous System, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Diabetic Nephropathies, Diabetic Retinopathy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Heart, Humans, Insulin, Male, Middle Aged, Incidence, Prevalence

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