ArticleMedical care2026
Development and Value of a Centralized Text Message-based Tracking and Support Program for the PRECIDENTD Study.
Article in Medical care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rates of, Reasons for, and Reactions to Discontinuation of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists: A Narrative Review.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Review
- PCORnet®: Accelerating Patient-Centered Comparative Clinical Effectiveness Research.Medical care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPRECIDENTD (PRevention of CardIovascular and DiabEtic KidNey Disease in Type 2 Diabetes) is a PCORnet® Study evaluating 2 classes of medications, SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists, among people with type 2 diabetes. Participants obtain their assigned medication through their health insurance and complete semi-annual study assessments.
objectiveWe engaged multiple partners to develop a centralized text message-based program to facilitate adherence and retention in PRECIDENTD and evaluated its performance from April 2024 to April 2025.
methodsThe PRECIDENTD study team applied best practices in digital health tool design and built the program with technology company MEMOTEXT. Patient partners identified program goals, co-wrote message content, and completed internal testing. We then deployed the program to PRECIDENTD participants and analyzed responses. MEASURES: We assessed response rate to interactive text messages, proportion of messages flagging participants needing additional support, and the adherence problems identified.
resultsThe text messaging program includes interactive messages querying if participants are taking the study medication, as well as one-way study timeline messages. During the first year, 450 PRECIDENTD participants across 20 sites received texts. Interactive message response rate was 80%, and 25% of responses identified problems (ie, trouble getting fills/refills and experiencing a health concern or side effect), prompting an outreach call.
conclusionsWe co-designed a digital tool that engaged participants and helped identify study participants needing assistance obtaining and adhering to study medications. Collaborative development of similar centralized tools may augment the capacity of national studies to answer important comparative effectiveness research questions.
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.