Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39680474›Full record

Trial reportDiabetes care2025

Effect of Community-Based Integrated Care for Patients With Diabetes and Depression (CIC-PDD) in China: A Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Trial.

Yanshang Wang, Dan Guo, Yiqi Xia, Mingzheng Hu, Ming Wang, Qianqian Yu, Zhansheng Li, Xiaoyi Zhang, Ruoxi Ding, Miaomiao Zhao and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetes care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. 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

13 authors.

Yanshang WangSchool of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6110-6296
Dan GuoDepartment of Research and Teaching, China Aerospace Science & Industry Corporation 731 Hospital, Beijing, China.
Yiqi XiaSchool of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Mingzheng HuChina Center for Health Development Studies, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Ming WangChina Center for Health Development Studies, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Qianqian YuSchool of Management, Shandong Second Medical University, Weifang, Shandong, China.
Zhansheng LiHealth Commission of Weifang, Weifang, Shandong, China.
Xiaoyi ZhangHealth Commission of Weifang, Weifang, Shandong, China.
Ruoxi DingPeking University Sixth Hospital, Beijing, China.
Miaomiao ZhaoShanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Zhenyu ShiSchool of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Dawei ZhuSchool of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Ping HeChina Center for Health Development Studies, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5040-5012

Funding

Major Project of the National Social Science Fund of China 21&ZD187Natural Science Foundation of Beijing Municipality 9212009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo develop a care model for patients with both diabetes and depression and assess the model's effectiveness. RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methodsIn this pragmatic cluster randomized trial, we allocated eight community health centers into two groups: the enhanced usual care group and the intervention group. A comprehensive care plan was developed for the intervention group based on the integrated care model. We recruited individuals aged ≥18 years with type 2 diabetes and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score ≥10). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the percentage of patients who had at least a 50% reduction in depressive symptoms and a reduction of at least 0.5 percentage points in HbA1c. The outcome analysis was conducted within the intention-to-treat population; missing data were multiply imputed.

resultsWe enrolled 630 participants, with 275 in the intervention group and 355 in the control group. A significantly greater percentage of patients in the intervention group met the primary outcome at 12 months (for depressive symptoms: risk difference [RD] 31.03% [62.06% vs. 31.02%, respectively; 95% CI 21.85-40.21]; for HbA1c: RD 19.16% [32.41% vs. 13.25%, respectively; 95% CI 11.35-26.97]). The patients in the intervention group showed significant enhancements in mental quality of life (mean difference [MD] 6.74 [46.57 vs. 39.83, respectively; 95% CI 3.75-9.74]), diabetes self-care activities (MD 0.69 [3.46 vs. 2.78, respectively; 95% CI 0.52-0.86]), medication adherence (MD 0.72 [6.49 vs. 5.78, respectively; 95% CI 0.37-1.07]), and experience of care (MD 0.89 [3.84 vs. 2.95, respectively; 95% CI 0.65-1.12]) at 12 months. Rural participants benefited more from the intervention.

conclusionsThe implementation strategy can serve as a valuable blueprint for the identification and treatment of patients with physical and mental multimorbidity in primary health care settings.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedDepressionDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2AdultAgedChinaFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansMaleMiddle AgedGlycated Hemoglobin

Identifiers

PMID39680474
PMCPMC11770166

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.