Type 2 diabetes is a major drain on resources.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

1. Physical activity and incident type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.Diabetologia · 2016
   Pooled it
2. Dietary advice for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2007
   Pooled it
3. Health economic evaluation of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a clinical practice focused review.Clinical medicine insights. Endocrinology and diabetes · 2015
   Review
4. Glipizide. A review of the pharmacoeconomic implications of the extended-release formulation in type 2 diabetes mellitus.PharmacoEconomics · 2000
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 38. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group.1998

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as