Evidence mapPaperPMID 20103550Full record

Trial reportDiabetes care2010

Effect of intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment strategies on mortality by baseline subgroup characteristics: the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial.

Jorge Calles-Escandón, Laura C Lovato, Denise G Simons-Morton, David M Kendall, Rodica Pop-Busui, Robert M Cohen, Denise E Bonds, Vivian A Fonseca, Faramarz Ismail-Beigi, Mary Ann Banerji and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetes care, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

69 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Cardiovascular risk reduction following diagnosis of diabetes by screening: 1-year results from the ADDITION-Cambridge trial cohort.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. What have clinical trials taught us about brain health?Cerebral circulation - cognition and behavior · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Jorge Calles-EscandónDepartment of Internal Medicine,Wake Forest UniversityHealth Sciences,Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA. jcalles@wfubmc.edu
Laura C Lovato
Denise G Simons-Morton
David M Kendall
Rodica Pop-Busui
Robert M Cohen
Denise E Bonds
Vivian A Fonseca
Faramarz Ismail-Beigi
Mary Ann Banerji
Alan Failor
Bruce Hamilton

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine if baseline subgroups in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial can be identified for whom intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment had different effects on all-cause mortality. RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methodsExploratory post hoc intention-to-treat comparisons were made between intensive and standard glycemia groups on all-cause mortality by subgroups defined by baseline characteristics.

resultsThere were few significant interactions between baseline characteristics and effects of intensive versus standard glycemia treatment on mortality: self-reported history of neuropathy (hazard ratio [HR] 1.95, 95% CI 1.41-2.69) versus no history of neuropathy (0.99, 0.79-1.26; P value for interaction 0.0008), higher A1C (A1C >8.5%: HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.22-2.22; A1C 7.5-8.4%: 1.00, 0.75-1.34; A1C <7.5%: 1.00, 0.67-1.50; P value for interaction 0.04), and aspirin use (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.13-1.85, compared with 0.96, 0.72-1.27, in nonusers; P value for interaction 0.03).

conclusionsWe found a remarkable similarity of effect from intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment on mortality across most baseline subgroups. No differential effect was found in subgroups defined by variables anticipated to have an interaction: age, duration of diabetes, and previous history of cardiovascular disease. The three baseline characteristics that defined subgroups for which there was a differential effect on mortality may help identify patients with type 2 diabetes at higher risk of mortality from intensive regimens for glycemic control. Further research is warranted.

Indexed as

AgedBlood GlucoseCardiovascular DiseasesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHumansHypoglycemic AgentsMaleBlood GlucoseHypoglycemic Agents

Identifiers

PMID20103550
PMCPMC2845012

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.