Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36701594›Full record

ReviewDiabetes care2023

The National Clinical Care Commission Report to Congress: Background, Methods, and Foundational Recommendations.

William H Herman, Ann Bullock, John M Boltri, Paul R Conlin, M Carol Greenlee, Aaron M Lopata, Clydette Powell, Howard Tracer, Dean Schillinger

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diabetes care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Roadmaps to Continuous Glucose Monitoring's Role in Transforming Diabetes Management.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2023
    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

9 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

William H HermanUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.ORCID 0000-0002-0502-674X
Ann BullockDivision of Diabetes Treatment and Prevention, Indian Health Service, Rockville, MD.
John M BoltriNortheast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH.
Paul R ConlinDepartment of Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0001-5720-0466
M Carol GreenleeWestern Slope Endocrinology, Grand Junction, CO.
Aaron M LopataMaternal and Child Health Bureau, Health Resources and Services Administration, Rockville, MD.
Clydette PowellSchool of Medicine and Health Services, George Washington University, Washington, DC.
Howard TracerAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD.
Dean SchillingerUniversity of California San Francisco School of Medicine and San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, CA.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality · USGeorge Washington University · USHarvard University · USHealth Resources and Services Administration · USIndian Health Service · USNortheast Ohio Medical University · USSan Francisco General Hospital · USUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

Regional Pilot And Feasibility Study Grants ProgramP30DK020572 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI DAVID P OLSON · 2013 to 2026
$24.3M
UCSF Nutrition Obesity Research CenterP30DK098722 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI CHRISTIAN VAISSE · 2015 to 2026
$14.6M
Research BaseP30DK092926 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MARY ELLEN MICHELE HEISLER, ADESUWA B OLOMU · 2011 to 2026
$10.0M
CDC HHSHRSA HHSNCCDPHP CDC HHS U18 DP006526NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK020572NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK092926NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK098722
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the first Federal Commission on Diabetes issued its report in 1975, the diabetes epidemic in the U.S. has accelerated, and efforts to translate advances in diabetes treatment into routine clinical practice have stalled. In 2021, the National Clinical Care Commission (NCCC) delivered a report to Congress that provided recommendations to leverage federal policies and programs to more effectively prevent and treat diabetes and its complications. In the five articles in this series, we present the NCCC's evidence-based recommendations to 1) reduce diabetes-related risks, prevent type 2 diabetes, and avert diabetes complications through changes in federal policies and programs affecting the general population; 2) prevent type 2 diabetes in at-risk individuals through targeted lifestyle and medication interventions; and 3) improve the treatment of diabetes and its complications to improve the health outcomes of people with diabetes. In this first article, we review the successes and limitations of previous federal efforts to combat diabetes. We then describe the establishment of and charge to the NCCC. We discuss the development of a hybrid conceptual model that guided the NCCC's novel all-of-government approach to address diabetes as both a societal and medical problem. We then review the procedures used by the NCCC to gather information from federal agencies, stakeholders, key informants, and the public and to conduct literature reviews. Finally, we review the NCCC's three foundational recommendations: 1) improve the coordination of non-health-related and health-related federal agencies to address the social and environmental conditions that are accelerating the diabetes epidemic; 2) ensure that all Americans at risk for and with diabetes have health insurance and access to health care; and 3) ensure that all federal policies and programs promote health equity in diabetes.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Health PromotionHumansUnited States

Identifiers

PMID36701594
PMCPMC9887619
OpenAlexW4318162959

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.