Cited by 347Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Management and EducationMedication Adherence and Compliance

Association between adherence and glycemic control in pediatric type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis

Hood, Korey K., Peterson, Claire M., Rohan, Jennifer M., Drotar, Dennis·2009·Pediatrics

Abstract

CONTEXT: Although adherence has been identified in practice guidelines for youth with type 1 diabetes to promote optimal glycemic control, there has been no systematic integration of studies investigating the adherence-glycemic control link. This recommendation partly stemmed from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT); however, this trial did not comprehensively measure adherence and had only 195 adolescents. OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to determine the magnitude of the adherence-glycemic control link in pediatric type 1 diabetes and evaluate its correlates. METHODS: Our data sources were PubMed (1950–2008), Scopus (1950–2008), and references from reviews in pediatric type 1 diabetes. Studies that included youth under age 19 with type 1 diabetes and a reported association between adherence and glycemic control were eligible for inclusion. Articles were not included if they contained youth with type 2 diabetes, had study samples that overlapped with other studies, or the results came from intervention studies. Of the eligible 26 studies, 21 had sufficient statistical data. Two authors independently extracted information by using a standardized protocol. Agreement between coders was high. RESULTS: The mean effect size across 21 studies, including 2492 youth with type 1 diabetes, was −0.28 (95% confidence interval: −0.32 to −0.24). As adherence increases, A1c values decrease. No sample or disease characteristics were correlates of the adherence-glycemic control link. Pre-DCCT studies had a mean effect size of −0.32 (8 studies; 1169 participants) compared with −0.25 in post-DCCT studies (13 studies; 1323 participants). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis supports the adherence-glycemic control link in pediatric type 1 diabetes. The weaker post-DCCT association suggests that the approach to intensive diabetes management has shortcomings. We conclude that this is because of a mismatch between what scientists and clinicians know is the best way to manage pediatric type 1 diabetes and the capabilities of youth and their families.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2009-0207

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hood, K. K., Peterson, C. M., Rohan, J. M., & Drotar, D.
Affiliations
Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US)
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
2009-12-01
Volume
124
Issue
6
Pages
e1171-e1179
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W2000449651
Cited by
347
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 32
FWCI
2.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K23DK073340)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
Keywords
type 1 diabetes in children, medication adherence, glycemic control, HbA1c, adolescents, intensive diabetes management, Diabetes Control and Complications Trial
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Male, Patient Compliance, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Treatment Outcome

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