Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Health systems and care delivery

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

For patients with serious comorbidities, diabetes management guidelines recommend more relaxed glycemic targets (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c] <8-8.5% rather than <7%) and cautious use of agents known to cause hypoglycemia. We examined glycemic control and use of insulin and/or sulfonylureas among commercially insured and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with serious comorbidities. Using OptumLabs Data Warehouse, we identified adults ≥18 years with diabetes and ≥1 of the following conditions (all identified by the guidelines) in 2014: dementia, end stage renal disease (ESRD), stages 3-4 chronic kidney disease (CKD), myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure (HF), cerebrovascular disease (CVD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cancer, arthritis, urinary incontinence, falls, depression, hypertension, cirrhosis, proliferative retinopathy, peripheral neuropathy, and recent emergency department or hospital visit for hypoglycemia. We then identified their last available HbA1c in 2015 and the medications filled within 100 days of this HbA1c. There were 216,839 adults (mean age 65.5 years, 50.5% women, 58.6% white) with diabetes included in the study. The proportion of patients with HbA1c <7% was lowest among patients with retinopathy (28.9%), hypoglycemia (33.4%), and neuropathy (48.4%); it was highest among patients with dementia (59.1%). The majority (between 51.5% and 58.6%) of patients with the remaining conditions also had HbA1c <7%. The plurality of patients in each disease cohort was treated insulin and/or sulfonylurea, including 66.9% of patients with hypoglycemia, 54.4% with ESRD, 51.9% with CKD, 51.1% with cirrhosis, 46.8% with MI, 48% with HF, and 43% with dementia. Sulfonylureas were used in combination with insulin by nearly 6% of patients with ESRD, CKD, and cirrhosis. Thus, despite efforts to individualize therapy, the majority of patients with chronic conditions achieve HbA1c <7% and the plurality do so using high risk drugs. Disclosure R.G. McCoy: None. H. Van Houten: None. K.J. Lipska: Other Relationship; Self; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Research Support; Self; National Institutes of Health. N. Shah: None.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

McCoy, R. G., Van Houten, H., Lipska, K. J., & Shah, N. D. (2018). High-Risk Medication Use to Achieve Tight Glycemic Control among U.S. Adults with Serious Chronic Conditions. Diabetes. https://doi.org/10.2337/db18-1652-p

Vancouver

McCoy RG, Van Houten H, Lipska KJ, Shah ND. High-Risk Medication Use to Achieve Tight Glycemic Control among U.S. Adults with Serious Chronic Conditions. Diabetes. 2018. doi:10.2337/db18-1652-p.

BibTeX

@article{mccoy2018-04c20648,
  author  = {McCoy, Rozalina Grubina and Van Houten, Holly and Lipska, Kasia J. and Shah, Nilay D.},
  title   = {{High-Risk Medication Use to Achieve Tight Glycemic Control among U.S. Adults with Serious Chronic Conditions}},
  journal = {Diabetes},
  year    = {2018},
  doi     = {10.2337/db18-1652-p},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2337/db18-1652-p}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Why it matters

This study found that many older adults with serious conditions including dementia were treated with insulin and/or sulfonylureas and had tight blood sugar control, despite guidelines recommending more relaxed targets for such patients. It does not test any treatment, cure, or prevention for Alzheimer's disease itself.

Study details

How this study scored 41/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 3 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 4 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 0 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year 0 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 0 of 4; Senior author's track record 3 of 4; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration 0 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 1 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 40 of the 97 points it could be judged on, which is 41 of 100. Total 41 of 100.40 of the 97 points we could judge = 41 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on institution's track record, so that was left out: it earned 40 of the 97 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Diabetes)
Journal's citation record 3 / 4 Diabetes: journal h-index 447 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2018 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 4 / 4 216,839 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 0 / 7 Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 0 / 5 0.0 citations a year over 10 year(s) since 2018
Impact for its field and year 0 / 6 Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 0 / 4 Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author Nilay D. Shah: h-index 86 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration 0 / 3 OpenAlex lists 0 institution(s) in 0 countries — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed 1 / 2 Not in PubMed, but has a DOI
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 40 / 97 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 40 of the 97 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100.
Total 41 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Related studies in Health systems and care delivery

Also in Health systems and care delivery

172 studies in the library are filed under Health systems and care delivery with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Health systems and care delivery hub.

Similar studies

More on Health systems and care delivery

See all studies in Health systems and care delivery →