Evidence mapPaperPMID 37215423Full record

ReviewWorld journal of clinical cases2023

Individualized diabetes care: Lessons from the real-world experience.

Xiao Ying Khor, Joseph M Pappachan, Mohammad Sadiq Jeeyavudeen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of clinical cases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

3 authors.

Xiao Ying KhorDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Preston PR2 9UT, United Kingdom.
Joseph M PappachanDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Preston PR2 9UT, United Kingdom.
Mohammad Sadiq JeeyavudeenDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, University Hospitals of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH16 4SA, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetes care is often difficult without a proper collaboration between the patient and the care provider as the disease is mostly self-managed by patients through adjustments in their lifestyles, and medication doses to optimise glycaemic control. Most clinical guidelines on the management of diabetes mellitus (DM) provide only broad principles on diabetes care, and the blind follow-up of such principles without a proper review and consideration of patient characteristics often results in inadequate glycaemic control and diabetes complications consequently. Therefore, a proper understanding of the pathobiology, clinical situation, and comorbidities of the individual case is of paramount importance to tailoring the most appropriate management strategy in real-world diabetes care. With the aid of five unique cases of DM [(1) Medically managed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with severe obesity; (2) Management of T2DM with unreliable glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c); (3) Obesity in a patient with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM); and (4) Late diagnosis and subsequent management of monogenic diabetes and 5. Sudden worsening of well-controlled T2DM)] we elaborate on the importance of individualised diabetes care and the practicalities in these situations. The review also provides an evidence update on the management of different forms of DM to guide physicians in optimising the care of their patients in day-to-day clinical practice.

Indexed as

DiabesityDiabetes in pancreatic cancerDouble diabetesIndividualised diabetes careMonogenic diabetes

Identifiers

PMID37215423
PMCPMC10198090

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.