Evidence mapPaperPMID 36158707Full record

ArticleAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2022

A Comparative analysis of type 2 diabetes management quality indicators in cancer survivors.

Eun J Ko, Su J Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Eun J KoSchool of Nursing, Research Institute of Nursing Science, Hallym University, Gangwon-do, Republic of Korea.
Su J LeeSchool of Nursing, Research Institute of Nursing Science, Hallym University, Gangwon-do, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to assess indicators of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) management, including adequate DM control, and treatment rates, in cancer survivors according to the time of DM diagnosis and to compare them with the DM management indicators of a non-cancer control group. Methods: We used the 2013-2019 data of the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey for this study. To compare their adequate DM control, and treatment rates, we identified 4918 patients with type 2 DM aged ≥ 30 years and classified them into pre-existing diabetes, pre-existing cancer, and diabetes without cancer groups. Predictors of adequate glycemic control and diabetes treatment were analyzed using binary logistic regression. Results: Diabetes without cancer group had higher fasting blood glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin A1c levels and lower adequate glycemic control than did the other two groups. The preexisting cancer group had low treatment rates. After adjusting for age, gender, employment status, and duration of diabetes, the preexisting cancer group had 0.51-fold lower odds of receiving treatment, such as insulin injection or oral diabetes medications, than the other two groups (adjusted odds ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.66). Conclusions: Cancer survivors had lower fasting glucose and HbA1c than those with diabetes without cancer. However, as a result of the sub-analysis, the treatment rate of the pre-existing cancer group was significantly lower than that of diabetes without cancer. Based on these results, cancer survivors' care-related healthcare workers should be aware of the need for monitoring blood sugar even in cancer survivors without underlying diabetes mellitus and pay more attention to early detection and active treatment of diabetes.

Indexed as

Cancer survivorsDiabetes managementDiabetes mellitusQuality indicators

Identifiers

PMID36158707
PMCPMC9500516

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.