ArticlePloS one2011
Comparative effectiveness of guidelines for the management of hyperlipidemia and hypertension for type 2 diabetes patients.
Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of financial incentives for improving diet and health through Medicare and Medicaid: A microsimulation study.PLoS medicine · 2019Article
- Validation of a Cardiovascular Disease Policy Microsimulation Model Using Both Survival and Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2017Article
- Choosing targets for glycaemia, blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in elderly individuals with diabetes mellitus.Drugs & aging · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSeveral guidelines to reduce cardiovascular risk in diabetes patients exist in North America, Europe, and Australia. Their ability to achieve this goal efficiently is unclear. METHODS AND
findingsDecision analysis was used to compare the efficiency and effectiveness of international contemporary guidelines for the management of hypertension and hyperlipidemia for patients aged 40-80 with type 2 diabetes. Measures of comparative effectiveness included the expected probability of a coronary or stroke event, incremental medication costs per event, and number-needed-to-treat (NNT) to prevent an event. All guidelines are equally effective, but they differ significantly in their medication costs. The range of NNT to prevent an event was small across guidelines (6.5-7.6 for males and 6.5-7.5 for females); a larger range of differences were observed for expected cost per event avoided (ranges, $117,269-$157,186 for males and $115,999-$163,775 for females). Australian and U.S. guidelines result in the highest and lowest expected costs, respectively.
conclusionsInternational guidelines based on the same evidence and seeking the same goal are similar in their effectiveness; however, there are large differences in expected medication costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.