CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25Diabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Management and ResearchPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

Prioritizing Patient Experiences in the Management of Diabetes and Its Complications: An Endocrine Society Position Statement

Open access
Kalyani, Rita R, Allende-Vigo, Myriam Z, Antinori-Lent, Kellie J, Close, Kelly L, Das, Sandeep R, Deroze, Phyllisa, Edelman, Steven V, El Sayed, Nuha A +3 more·2024·The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
DOI 10.1210/clinem/dgad745
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Diabetes can be an arduous journey both for people with diabetes (PWD) and their caregivers. While the journey of every person with diabetes is unique, common themes emerge in managing this disease. To date, the experiences of PWD have not been fully considered to successfully implement the recommended standards of diabetes care in practice. It is critical for health-care providers (HCPs) to recognize perspectives of PWD to achieve optimal health outcomes. Further, existing tools are available to facilitate patient-centered care but are often underused. This statement summarizes findings from multistakeholder expert roundtable discussions hosted by the Endocrine Society that aimed to identify existing gaps in the management of diabetes and its complications and to identify tools needed to empower HCPs and PWD to address their many challenges. The roundtables included delegates from professional societies, governmental organizations, patient advocacy organizations, and social enterprises committed to making life better for PWD. Each section begins with a clinical scenario that serves as a framework to achieve desired health outcomes and includes a discussion of resources for HCPs to deliver patient-centered care in clinical practice. As diabetes management evolves, achieving this goal will also require the development of new tools to help guide HCPs in supporting PWD, as well as concrete strategies for the efficient uptake of these tools in clinical practice to minimize provider burden. Importantly, coordination among various stakeholders including PWD, HCPs, caregivers, policymakers, and payers is critical at all stages of the patient journey.

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 · 10.1210/clinem/dgad745

Cites

39 of 39 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?

  • In a randomized multicenter clinical trial of 319 patients over 13 weeks, use of an automated insulin pump paired with CGM and an algorithm to automatically adjust insulin delivery based on real-time glucose levels led to a mean HbA1C reduction of −0.6% (95% CI, -0.8% to -0.4%; P < .001) compared with multiple daily injections of insulin and CGM alone.

    “In a randomized multicenter clinical trial of 319 patients over 13 weeks, use of an automated insulin pump paired with CGM and an algorithm to automatically adjust insulin delivery based on real-time glucose levels led to a mean HbA1C reduction of −0.6% (95% CI, –0.8% to –0.4%; P < .001) compared with multiple daily injections of insulin and CGM alone.104”

    From Diagnosis and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in Adults (2025) · cites this paper as [104]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Part of this paper’s reference list could not be split into single entries.

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 64

  1. Das SR, Everett BM, Birtcher KK, et al. 2020 expert consensus de- cision pathway on novel therapies for cardiovascular risk reduc- tion in patients with type 2 diabetes: a report of the American college of cardiology solution set oversight committee. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(9):1117-1145.
  2. Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, Kansagara D, et al. Hemoglobin A1c targets for glycemic control with pharmacologic therapy for nonpregnant adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a guidance statement update from the American college of physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168(8):569-576.
  3. LeRoith D, Biessels GJ, Braithwaite SS, et al. Treatment of dia- betes in older adults: an endocrine society* clinical practice guide- line. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019;104(5):1520-1574.
  4. Hornsten A, Lundman B, Selstam EK, Sandstrom H. Patient satis- faction with diabetes care. J Adv Nurs. 2005;51(6):609-617.
  5. Lemmens LC, de Bruin SR, Struijs JN, Rijken M, Nijpels G, Baan CA. Patient involvement in diabetes care: experiences in nine dia- betes care groups. Int J Integr Care. 2015;15(4):e044.
  6. Simacek KF, Nelson T, Miller-Baldi M, Bolge SC. Patient engage- ment in type 2 diabetes mellitus research: what patients want. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2018;12:595-606.
  7. Khurana L, Durand EM, Gary ST, et al. Mechanisms for improv- ing diabetes patient-provider communication through optimal use of e-clinical technologies. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2019;13: 981-992.
  8. Alzaid A. There is a missing ingredient in diabetes care today. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014;16(8):542-544.
  9. Cayley WE Jr. Four evidence-based communication strategies to enhance patient care. Fam Pract Manag. 2018;25(5):13-17.
  10. Connor U, Kessler L, de Groot M, Mac Neill R, Sandy R. Implementing person-centered communication in diabetes care: a new tool for diabetes care professionals. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2019;13:1443-1450.
  11. Misra-Hebert AD, Isaacson JH. Overcoming health care dispar- ities via better cross-cultural communication and health literacy. Cleve Clin J Med. 2012;79(2):127-133.
  12. McCabe CF, O'Brien-Combs A, Anderson OS. Cultural compe- tency training and evaluation methods across dietetics education: a narrative review. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2020;120(7):1198-1209.
  13. Kessels RP. Patients' memory for medical information. J R Soc Med. 2003;96(5):219-222.
  14. Ha Dinh TT, Bonner A, Clark R, Ramsbotham J, Hines S. The ef- fectiveness of the teach-back method on adherence and self- management in health education for people with chronic disease: a systematic review. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016;14(1):210-247.
  15. Miller W, Rollnick S, ed. Motivational Interviewing Third Edition: Helping People Change. 3rd ed. Guilford; 2013.
  16. Schaefer MR, Kavookjian J. The impact of motivational inter- viewing on adherence and symptom severity in adolescents and young adults with chronic illness: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2017;100(12):2190-2199.
  17. Suire KB, Kavookjian J, Wadsworth DD. Motivational interview- ing for overweight children: a systematic review. Pediatrics. 2020;146(5):e20200193.
  18. Ekong G, Kavookjian J. Motivational interviewing and outcomes in adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2016;99(6):944-952.
  19. Frost H, Campbell P, Maxwell M, et al. Effectiveness of motiv- ational interviewing on adult behaviour change in health and so- cial care settings: a systematic review of reviews. PLoS One. 2018;13(10):e0204890.
  20. Motivational Interviewing Network of Trainers. Understanding Motivational Interviewing. Updated August 2019. Accessed December 13, 2023. https://motivationalinterviewing.org/ understanding-motivational-interviewing 27. Ivanov EABMFWABCKEPNN. Patient-Physician communica- tion and diabetes self-care. J Clin Outcomes Manag. 2016;23(11):146123.
  21. Berhe KK, Gebru HB, Kahsay HB. Effect of motivational inter- viewing intervention on HgbA1C and depression in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (systematic review and meta-analysis). PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0240839.
  22. Maslakpak MH, Parizad N, Ghahremani A, Alinejad V. The effect of motivational interviewing on the self-efficacy of people with type 2 diabetes: A randomised controlled trial. J Diabetes Nurs. 2021;25(4):204.
  23. Hong Y-R, Huo J, Jo A, Cardel M, Mainous AG. Association of patient-provider teach-back communication with diabetic out- comes: a cohort study. J Am Board Fam Med. 2020;33(6): 903-912.
  24. American Medical Association. Practice innovation strategies: Patient-centered care. Updated October 11, 2022. Accessed December 13, 2023. https://www.ama-assn.org/ practice-management/ama-steps-forward/practice-innovation-strate gies-patient-centered-care 39. UCLA Center for Human Nutrition. Sample Scripts for Stages of Change. Accessed December 13, 2023. https://www.cellinter active.com/ucla/physcian_ed/scripts_for_change.html
  25. Fisher EB, Boothroyd RI, Elstad EA, et al. Peer support of complex health behaviors in prevention and disease management with spe- cial reference to diabetes: systematic reviews. Clin Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;3(1):4.
  26. Warshaw H, Hodgson L, Heyman M, et al. The role and value of ongoing and peer support in diabetes care and education. Diabetes Educ. 2019;45(6):569-579.
  27. Azmiardi A, Murti B, Febrinasari RP, Tamtomo DG. The effect of peer support in diabetes self-management education on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Epidemiol Health. 2021;43:e2021090.
  28. Polonsky WH, Anderson BJ, Lohrer PA, et al. Assessment of diabetes-related distress. Diabetes Care. 1995;18(6):754-760.
  29. Carcone AI, Ellis DA, Naar-King S. Linking caregiver strain to diabetes illness management and health outcomes in a sample of adolescents in chronically poor metabolic control. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2012;33(4):343-351.
  30. Kalra S, Jena BN, Yeravdekar R. Emotional and psychological needs of people with diabetes. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2018;22(5):696-704.
  31. Golden SH, Lazo M, Carnethon M, et al. Examining a bidirection- al association between depressive symptoms and diabetes. JAMA. 2008;299(23):2751-2759. 1174 The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2024, Vol. 109, No. 5
  32. Allison DB, Newcomer JW, Dunn AL, et al. Obesity among those with mental disorders: a national institute of mental health meet- ing report. Am J Prev Med. 2009;36(4):341-350.
  33. Snoek FJ, Pouwer F, Welch GW, Polonsky WH. Diabetes-related emotional distress in Dutch and U.S. diabetic patients: cross- cultural validity of the problem areas in diabetes scale. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(9):1305-1309.
  34. Young V, Eiser C, Johnson B, et al. Eating problems in adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Diabet Med. 2013;30(2):189-198.
  35. Han P, Nicholson W, Norton A, et al. DiabetesSistersVoices: vir- tual patient community to identify research priorities for women living with diabetes. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(5):e13312.
  36. Li C, Ford ES, Zhao G, Ahluwalia IB, Pearson WS, Mokdad AH. Prevalence and correlates of undiagnosed depression among U.S. adults with diabetes: the behavioral risk factor surveillance sys- tem, 2006. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2009;83(2):268-279.
  37. García-Pérez LE, Álvarez M, Dilla T, Gil-Guillén V, Orozco-Beltrán D. Adherence to therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Ther. 2013;4(2):175-194.
  38. Caetano I, Santiago LM, Marques M. Impact of written informa- tion on control and adherence in type 2 diabetes. Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2018;64(2):140-147.
  39. Campbell JA, Yan A, Egede LE. Community-based participatory research interventions to improve diabetes outcomes: a systematic review. Diabetes Educ. 2020;46(6):527-539.
  40. Vaughan EM, Johnston CA, Cardenas VJ, Moreno JP, Foreyt JP. Integrating CHWs as part of the team leading diabetes group vis- its: a randomized controlled feasibility study. Diabetes Educ. 2017;43(6):589-599.
  41. James TL. Improving referrals to diabetes self-management educa- tion in medically underserved adults. Diabetes Spectr. 2021;34(1): 20-26.
  42. Powers MA, Bardsley JK, Cypress M, et al. Diabetes self- management education and support in adults with type 2 diabetes: a consensus report of the American diabetes association, the asso- ciation of diabetes care & education specialists, the academy of nutrition and dietetics, the American academy of family physi- cians, the American academy of PAs, the American association of nurse practitioners, and the American pharmacists association. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(7):1636-1649.
  43. Strawbridge LM, Lloyd JT, Meadow A, Riley GF, Howell BL. Use of Medicare's diabetes self-management training benefit. Health Educ Behav. 2015;42(4):530-538.
  44. Strawbridge LM, Lloyd JT, Meadow A, Riley GF, Howell BL. One-year outcomes of diabetes self-management training among medicare beneficiaries newly diagnosed with diabetes. Med Care. 2017;55(4):391-397.
  45. Siminerio L, Hamm M, Kanter J, Cameron FA, Krall J. A diabetes education model in primary care: provider and staff perspectives. Diabetes Educ. 2019;45(5):498-506.
  46. Powers MA, Bardsley JK, Cypress M, et al. Diabetes self- management education and support in adults with type 2 diabetes: a consensus report of the American diabetes association, the asso- ciation of diabetes care & education specialists, the academy of nutrition and dietetics, the American academy of family physi- cians, the American academy of PAs, the American association of nurse practitioners, and the American pharmacists association. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(7):1636-1649.
  47. Whitehouse CR, Long JA, Maloney LM, Daniels K, Horowitz DA, Bowles KH. Feasibility of diabetes self-management tele- health education for older adults during transitions in care. Res Gerontol Nurs. 2020;13(3):138-145.
  48. Boakye EA, Varble A, Rojek R, et al. Sociodemographic factors associated with engagement in diabetes self-management educa- tion among people with diabetes in the United States. Public Health Rep. 2018;133(6):685-691.
  49. Fritz HA. Challenges to developing diabetes self-management skills in a low-income sample in North Carolina, USA. Health Soc Care Community. 2017;25(1):26-34.
  50. Luo H, Basu R, Bell RA, et al. Rural-urban differences in uptake of diabetes self-management education among medicare beneficiar- ies: results from the 2016 to 2018 medicare current beneficiary survey. J Rural Health. 2022;38(4):986-993.
  51. Stotz SA, Ricks KA, Eisenstat SA, Wexler DJ, Berkowitz SA. Opportunities for interventions that address socioeconomic bar- riers to type 2 diabetes management: patient perspectives. Sci Diabetes Self Manag Care. 2021;47(2):153-163.
  52. Testerman J, Chase D. Influences on diabetes self-management education participation in a low-income, Spanish-speaking, Latino population. Diabetes Spectr. 2018;31(1):47-57.
  53. Brunk DR, Taylor AG, Clark ML, Williams IC, Cox DJ. A cultur- ally appropriate self-management program for hispanic adults with type 2 diabetes and low health literacy skills. J Transcult Nurs. 2017;28(2):187-194.
  54. Jones J, Goins RT, Schure M, Winchester B, Bradley V. Putting self-management in the context of community-dwelling American Indians living with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2020;46(1):108-117.
  55. Foster NC, Beck RW, Miller KM, et al. State of type 1 diabetes management and outcomes from the T1D exchange in 2016-2018. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019;21(2):66-72.
  56. Giugliano D, Maiorino MI, Bellastella G, Chiodini P, Ceriello A, Esposito K. Efficacy of insulin analogs in achieving the hemoglo- bin A1c target of <7% in type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Care. 2011;34(2): 510-517.
  57. Chen Y, Rolka D, Xie H, Saydah S. Imputed state-level prevalence of achieving goals to prevent complications of diabetes in adults with self-reported diabetes-United States, 2017-2018. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(45):1665-1670.
  58. Effect of intensive diabetes treatment on the development and pro- gression of long-term complications in adolescents with insulin- dependent diabetes mellitus: diabetes control and complications trial. J Pediatr. 1994; 125(2):177-188.
  59. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Lancet. 1998; 352(9131): 837-853.
  60. Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on com- plications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34). Lancet. 1998; 352(9131):854-865.
  61. Nelson AJ, Pagidipati NJ, Aroda VR, et al. Incorporating SGLT2i and GLP-1RA for cardiovascular and kidney disease risk reduc- tion: call for action to the cardiology community. Circulation. 2021;144(1):74-84.
  62. Herges JR, Neumiller JJ, McCoy RG. Easing the financial burden of diabetes management: a guide for patients and primary care clinicians. Clin Diabetes. 2021;39(4):427-436.
  63. Reach G, Pechtner V, Gentilella R, Corcos A, Ceriello A. Clinical inertia and its impact on treatment intensification in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab. 2017;43(6):501-511. 107. Khunti K, Nikolajsen A, Thorsted BL, Andersen M, Davies MJ, Paul SK. Clinical inertia with regard to intensifying therapy in peo- ple with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2016;18(4):401-409. 108. Powell RE, Zaccardi F, Beebe C, et al. Strategies for overcoming therapeutic inertia in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2021;23(9):2137-2154. 109. Thomas M, Magwire M, Gosch K, et al. Cardiometabolic center of excellence: a novel care delivery model for secondary preven- tion of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2021;14(10):e007682. 110. Wrzal PK, Mohseni AA, Fournier C, et al. A cross-sectional survey to assess reasons for therapeutic inertia in people with type 2 dia- betes Mellitus and preferred strategies to overcome it from the per- spectives of persons with diabetes and general/family practitioners: results from the MOTION study. Can J Diabetes. 2022;46(4):337-345.e2. 111. American Diabetes Association. Overcoming Therapeutic Inertia. Accessed December 13, 2023. https://www.therapeuticinertia. diabetes.org/ 112. American Diabetes Association. Practice Guidelines Resources. Accessed December 13, 2023. https://professional.diabetes.org/ content-page/practice-guidelines-resources 113. Endocrine Society. Clinical Practice Guidelines. Accessed December 13, 2023. https://www.endocrine.org/clinical-practice- guidelines 114.
  64. Acosta JN, Falcone GJ, Rajpurkar P, Topol EJ. Multimodal bio- medical AI. Nat Med. 2022;28(9):1773-1784.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kalyani, R. R., Allende-Vigo, M. Z., Antinori-Lent, K. J., Close, K. L., Das, S. R., Deroze, P., Edelman, S. V., El Sayed, N. A., Kerr, D., Neumiller, J. J., & Norton, A.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of Puerto Rico System (PR)
  • Shadyside Hospital (US)
  • Close Concerns (United States) (US)
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • dQ&A, The Diabetes Research Company , San Francisco, CA 94117 , USA
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • American Diabetes Association, Harvard Medical School , Boston, MA 02215 , USA
  • Diabetes Technology Society (US)
  • Washington State University Spokane (US)
  • DiabetesSisters, #180, 1112 W Boughton Road , Bolingbrook, IL 60440 , USA
Corresponding author
Kalyani, Rita R
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
Publisher
The Endocrine Society
Published
2024-02-21
Volume
109
Issue
5
Pages
1155-1178
ISSN
  • 0021-972X (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-7197
DOI
10.1210/clinem/dgad745
OpenAlex
W4391993994
Cited by
25
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 3
FWCI
5.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
academic.oup.com/pages/standard-publication-reuse-rights (vor)
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Abbott, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, and Vertex
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
diabetes management, patient-centered care, patient experience, diabetes complications, patient perspectives, caregiver burden, patient empowerment, clinical decision support systems, provider burden, stakeholder coordination
MeSH terms
Attitude of Health Personnel, Diabetes Mellitus, Health Personnel, Humans, Patient-Centered Care, Patient Outcome Assessment

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