Cited by 852Diabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Management and Education

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023

Open access
ElSayed, Nuha A., Aleppo, Grazia, Aroda, Vanita R., Bannuru, Raveendhara R., Brown, Florence M., Bruemmer, Dennis, Collins, Billy S., Hilliard, Marisa E. +12 more·2023·Diabetes Care

Abstract

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

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 · 10.2337/dc23-s009

Cites

112 of 112 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?

  • GLP-1 RAs are indicated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (all) and obesity (liraglutide and semaglutide only) and have beneficial effects on patient-important outcomes such as weight loss, cardiovascular and kidney events, hepatic steatosis, and mortality.

    “Clinically, GLP-1 RAs are indicated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (all) and obesity (liraglutide and semaglutide only) and have beneficial effects on patient-important outcomes such as weight loss, cardiovascular and kidney events, hepatic steatosis, and mortality.5,7–9,11,30”

    From Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Thyroid Cancer: A Narrative Review (2024) · cites this paper as [8]

    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
  • Modern treatment guidelines for type 2 diabetes and essential hypertension recommend a stepped care approach to pharmacotherapy.

    “By contrast, modern treatment guidelines for type 2 diabetes 154 and essential hypertension 155 (also nutrition related chronic diseases), do recommend a stepped care approach to pharmacotherapy.”

    From Effectiveness and safety of drugs for obesity (2024) · cites this paper as [154]

    The Combination Therapy section (p. 10) describes stepwise addition of diabetes medications as a traditional recommendation and recommends intensifying treatment when goals are not met. It also says current intensification need not be purely sequential and may begin with combination therapy, so the claim overstates the guideline’s endorsement of stepped care. The hypertension portion is attached to a different citation and is not judged here. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • GLP-1 RAs are contraindicated for patients with a personal or family history of MTC or those with multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2.

    “As a result, GLP-1 RAs are contraindicated for patients with a personal or family history of MTC or those with multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2.8,17,22”

    From Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Thyroid Cancer: A Narrative Review (2024) · cites this paper as [8]

    The clinical-considerations table (p. 9) mentions thyroid C-cell tumors in rodents but says their relevance to humans is undetermined. Our copy does not state that GLP-1 RAs are contraindicated for patients with a personal or family history of MTC or with multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2 (searched: MTC, MEN2, and thyroid-cancer contraindications). (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A 5% weight reduction is insufficient to improve many aspects of health, and greater weight losses confer greater benefits, with some data suggesting a threshold effect for reduction in some important comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes remission.

    “However, a 5% weight reduction is insufficient to improve many aspects of health, and greater weight losses confer greater benefits, 23,82,83 with some data suggesting that there may be a threshold effect for reduction in some important comorbidities such as CVD and diabetes remission.[84][85][86]”

    From Approach to Obesity Treatment in Primary Care: A Review (2024) · cites this paper as [84]

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

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 114 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [23]23. Peters AL, Laffel L (Eds.). American Diabetes Association/JDRF Type 1 Diabetes Sourcebook. Alexandria, VA, American Diabetes Association, 2013
  2. [25]25. Bell KJ, Barclay AW, Petocz P, Colagiuri S, Brand-Miller JC. Ef fi cacy of carbohydrate counting in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2014;2:133 -140
  3. [55]55. Abdul-Ghani MA, Puckett C, Triplitt C, et al. Initial combination therapy with metformin, pioglitazone and exenatide is more effective than sequential add-on therapy in subjects with newonset diabetes. Results from the Ef fi cacy and Durability of Initial Combination Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes (EDICT): a randomized trial. Diabetes Obes Metab 2015;17:268 -275
  4. [69]69. Davies M, Heller S, Sreenan S, et al. Onceweekly exenatide versus onceor twice-daily insulin detemir: randomized, open-label, clinical trial of ef fi cacy and safety in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with metformin alone or in combination with sulfonylureas. Diabetes Care 2013;36:1368 -1376

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
ElSayed, N. A., Aleppo, G., Aroda, V. R., Bannuru, R. R., Brown, F. M., Bruemmer, D., Collins, B. S., Hilliard, M. E., Isaacs, D., Johnson, E. L., Kahan, S., Khunti, K., Leon, J., Lyons, S. K., Perry, M. L., Prahalad, P., Pratley, R. E., Seley, J. J., Stanton, R. C., & Gabbay, R. A.
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2022-12-12
Volume
46
Issue
Supplement_1
Pages
S140-S157
ISSN
0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4311264067
Cited by
851
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 64 · 2025: 149 · 2024: 360 · 2023: 277 · 2022: 1
FWCI
28.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
glycemic control, pharmacotherapy, diabetes mellitus, antidiabetic drugs, clinical guidelines, treatment goals, quality of care
MeSH terms
Diabetes Mellitus, Endocrinology, Humans, Reference Standards, Societies, Medical, Standard of Care

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