Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 306

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Health care and health status and outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes.

Harris, M I·2000·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate access and utilization of medical care, and health status and outcomes that would be influenced by recent medical care, in a representative sample of patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A national sample of 733 adults with type 2 diabetes was studied from 1991 to 1994 in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Structured questionnaires and clinical and laboratory assessments were used to determine the frequencies of physician visits, health insurance coverage, screening for diabetes complications, treatment for hyperglycemia, hypertension, and dyslipidemia; and the proportion of patients who met treatment goals and established criteria for health outcome measures including hyperglycemia, albuminuria, obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. RESULTS: Almost all patients had 1 source of primary care (95%), 2 or more physician visits during the past year (88%), and health insurance coverage (91%). Most (76%) were treated with insulin or oral agents for their diabetes, and 45% of those patients taking insulin monitored their blood glucose at least once per day The patients were frequently screened for retinopathy (52%), hypertension (88%), and dyslipidemia (84%). Of those patients with hypertension, 83% were diagnosed and treated with antihypertensive agents and only 17% were undiagnosed or untreated; most of the patients known to have dyslipidemia were treated with medication or diet (89%). Health status and outcomes were less than optimal: 58% had HbA1c >7.0, 45% had BMI >30, 28% had microalbuminuria, and 8% had clinical proteinuria. Of those patients known to have hypertension and dyslipidemia, 60% were not controlled to accepted levels. In addition, 22% of patients smoked cigarettes, 26% had to be hospitalized during the previous year, and 42% assessed their health status as fair or poor. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of health care access and utilization, screening for diabetes complications, and treatment of hyperglycemia, hypertension, and dyslipidemia in type 2 diabetes are high; however, health status and outcomes are unsatisfactory. There are likely to be multiple reasons for this discordance, including intractability of diabetes to current therapies, patient self-care practices, physician medical care practices, and characteristics of U.S. health care systems.

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 · 10.2337/diacare.23.6.754

Cites

24 of 24 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 24 references

Cited by

See all 306

Metadata

Authors
Harris, M. I.
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2000-06-01
Volume
23
Issue
6
Pages
754-758
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2147099372
Cited by
306
References
24
FWCI
14.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Health care and health status and outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2337/diacare.23.6.754
The paper
Harris, M. I. (2000). Health care and health status and outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.23.6.754

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.