The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Basal Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE—To determine the safety and efficacy of the long-acting analog insulin glargine compared with NPH insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes who were previously treated with insulin alone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—A total of 518 subjects with type 2 diabetes who were receiving NPH insulin with or without regular insulin for postprandial control were randomized to receive insulin glargine (HOE 901) once daily (n = 259) or NPH insulin once or twice daily (n = 259) for 28 weeks in an open-label, multicenter trial. Doses were adjusted to obtain target fasting glucose <6.7 mmol/l. At study end point, the median total daily insulin dose in both treatment groups was 0.75 IU/kg. RESULTS—The treatment groups showed similar improvements in HbA1c from baseline to end point on intent-to-treat analysis. The mean change (means ± SD) in HbA1c from baseline to end point was similar in the insulin glargine group (−0.41 ± 0.1%) and the NPH group (−0.59 ± 0.1%) after patients began with an average baseline HbA1c of ∼8.5%. The treatments were associated with similar reductions in fasting glucose levels. Overall, mild symptomatic hypoglycemia was similar in insulin glargine subjects (61.4%) and NPH insulin subjects (66.8%). However, nocturnal hypoglycemia in the insulin glargine group was reduced by 25% during the treatment period after the dose-titration phase (26.5 vs. 35.5%, P = 0.0136). Subjects in the insulin glargine group experienced less weight gain than those in the NPH group (0.4 vs. 1.4 kg, P < 0.0007). CONCLUSIONS—In patients with type 2 diabetes, once-daily bedtime insulin glargine is as effective as once- or twice-daily NPH in improving and maintaining glycemic control. In addition, insulin glargine demonstrates a lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia and less weight gain compared with NPH insulin.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group (1995) · Diabetes · doi:10.2337/diab.44.11.1249 · Cited by 1,923
Cited by
Riddle (2003) · doi:10.2337/diacare.26.11.3080 · Cited by 1,479
Management of diabetes and hyperglycemia in hospitals.
Clement, S., Braithwaite, S. S., Magee, M. F., Ahmann, A., Smith, E. P., Schafer, R. G., Hirsch, I. B., & on behalf of the Diabetes in Hospitals Writing Committee (2004) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.27.2.553 · Cited by 1,266
on behalf of the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes 5 (LEAD-5) met+SU Study Group, Russell-Jones, D., Vaag, A., Schmitz, O., Sethi, B. K., Lalic, N., Antic, S., Zdravkovic, M., Ravn, G. M., & Simó, R. (2009) · Diabetologia · doi:10.1007/s00125-009-1472-y · Cited by 835
Heine, R. J., Van Gaal, L. F., Johns, D., Mihm, M. J., Widel, M. H., Brodows, R. G., & for the GWAA Study Group* (2005) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-143-8-200510180-00006 · Cited by 795
Hirsch, I. B. (2005) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra040832 · Cited by 667
Metadata
- Authors
- Rosenstock, J., Schwartz, S. L., Clark, C. M., Park, G. D., Donley, D. W., & Edwards, M. B.
- Venue
- Diabetes Care
- Publisher
- American Diabetes Association
- Published
- 2001-04-01
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 631-636
- ISSN
- 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-5548
- OpenAlex
- W2119954342
- Cited by
- 478
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 20.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Basal Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2337/diacare.24.4.631
- The paper
- Rosenstock, J., Schwartz, S. L., Clark, C. M., Park, G. D., Donley, D. W., & Edwards, M. B. (2001). Basal Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes Care. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.24.4.631
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.