LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Craig, P; Dieppe, P; MacIntyre, S; Mitchie, S; Nazareth, I; Petticrew, M (2008)
Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
Journal: The BMJ
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Research Methods and Reporting, Research, R1
OBJECTIVE: To examine the relation between blood pressure and the development of early retinopathy in adolescents with childhood onset type 1 diabetes. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Diabetes Complications Assessment Service at the Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 1869 patients with type 1 diabetes (54% female) screened for retinopathy with baseline median age 13.4 (interquartile range 12.0-15.2) years, duration 4.9 (3.1-7.0) years, and albumin excretion rate of 4.4 (3.1-6.8) microg/min plus a subgroup of 1093 patients retinopathy-free at baseline and followed for a median 4.1 (2.4-6.6) years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Early background retinopathy; blood pressure. RESULTS: Overall, retinopathy developed in 673 (36%) participants at any time point. In the retinopathy-free group, higher systolic blood pressure (odds ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval 1.003 to 1.02) and diastolic blood pressure (1.01, 1.002 to 1.03) were predictors of retinopathy, after adjustment for albumin excretion rate (1.27, 1.13 to 1.42), haemoglobin A(1c) (1.08, 1.02 to 1.15), duration of diabetes (1.16, 1.13 to 1.19), age (1.13, 1.08 to 1.17), and height (0.98, 0.97 to 0.99). In a subgroup of 1025 patients with albumin excretion rate below 7.5 microg/min, the cumulative risk of retinopathy at 10 years' duration of diabetes was higher for those with systolic blood pressure on or above the 90th centile compared with those below the 90th centile (58% v 35%, P=0.03). The risk was also higher for patients with diastolic blood pressure on or above the 90th centile compared with those below the 90th centile (57% v 35%, P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Both systolic and diastolic blood pressure are predictors of retinopathy and increase the probability of early retinopathy independently of incipient nephropathy in young patients with type 1 diabetes.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1 Medical Research Council. A framework for the development and evaluation of RCTs for complex interventions to improve health. London: MRC, 2000.
    • 2 Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, et al. Framework for the design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. BMJ 2000;321:694-6.
    • 3 Hardeman W, Sutton S, Griffin S, Johnston M, White A, Wareham NJ, et al. A causal modelling approach to the development of theory-based behaviour change programmes for trial evaluation. Health Educ Res 2005;20:676-87.
    • 4 Campbell NC, Murray E, Darbyshire J, Emery J, Farmer A, Griffiths F, et al. Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ 2007;334:455-9.
    • 5 Oakley A, Strange V, Bonell C, Allen E, Stephenson J, Ripple Study Team. Process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. BMJ 2006;332:413-6.
    • 6 Campbell M, Donner A, Klar N. Developments in cluster randomised trials and statistics in medicine. Stat Med 2007;26:2-19.
    • 7 Shiell A, Hawe P, Gold L. Complex interventions or complex systems? Implications for health economic evaluation. BMJ 2008;336:1281-3.
    • 8 Belsky J, Melhuish E, Barnes J, Leyland AH, Romaniuk H, National Evaluation of Sure Start Research Team. Effects of Sure Start local programmes on children and families: early findings from a quasiexperimental, cross sectional study. BMJ 2006;332:1476-81.
    • 9 Haynes B. Can it work? Does it work? Is it worth it? The testing of healthcare interventions is evolving. BMJ 1999;319:652-3.
    • 10 Michie S, Abraham C. Interventions to change health behaviours: evidence-based or evidence-inspired? Psychol Health 2004;19:29-49.
    • 11 Muir H. Let science rule: the rational way to run societies. New Scientist 2008;198:40-3.
    • 12 Creegan C, Hedges A. Towards a policy evaluation service: developing infrastructure to support the use of experimental and quasiexperimental methods. London: Ministry of Justice, 2007.
    • 13 Thomson H, Hoskins R, Petticrew M, Ogilvie D, Craig N, Quinn T, et al. Evaluating the health effects of social interventions. BMJ 2004;328:282-5.
    • 14 Ogilvie D, Mitchell R, Mutrie N, Petticrew M, Platt S. Evaluating health effects of transport interventions: methodologic case study. Am J Prev Med 2006;31:118-26.
    • 15 Academy of Medical Sciences. Identifying the environmental causes of disease: how should we decide what to believe and when to take action? London: Academy of Medical Sciences, 2007.
    • 16 Torgerson D, Byford S. Economic modelling before clinical trials. BMJ 2002;325:98.
    • 17 Eldridge S, Spencer A, Cryer C, Pearsons S, Underwood M, Feder G. Why modelling a complex intervention is an important precursor to trial design: lessons from studying an intervention to reduce falls-related injuries in elderly people. J Health Services Res Policy 2005;10:133-42.
    • 18 Eldridge S, Ashby D, Feder G, Rudnicka AR, Ukoumunne OC. Lessons for cluster randomized trials in the twenty-first century: a systematic review of trials in primary care. Clin Trials 2004;1:80-90.
    • 19 Power R, Langhaug L, Nyamurera T, Wilson D, Bassett M, Cowan F. Developing complex interventions for rigorous evaluation-a case study from rural Zimbabwe. Health Educ Res 2004;19:570-5.
    • 20 Howden-Chapman P, Crane J, Matheson A, Viggers H, Cunningham M, Blakely T, et al. Retrofitting houses with insulation to reduce health inequalities: aims and methods of a clustered community-based trial. Soc Sci Med 2005;61:2600-10.
    • 21 Black N. Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ 1996;312:1215-8.
    • 22 Glasziou P, Chalmers I, Rawlins M, McCulloch P. When are randomised trials unnecessary? Picking signal from noise. BMJ 2007;334:349-51.
    • 23 MacMahon S, Collins R. Reliable assessment of the effects of treatment on mortality and major morbidity. II. observational studies. Lancet 2001;357:455-62.
    • 24 Gunnell D, Fernando R, Hewagama M, Priyangika W, Konradsen F, Eddleston M. The impact of pesticide regulations on suicide in Sri Lanka. Int J Epidemiol 2007;36:1235-42.
    • 25 Clancy L, Goodman P, Sinclair H, Dockery DW. Effect of air pollution control on death rates in Dublin, Ireland: an intervention study. Lancet 2002;360:1210-4.
    • 26 Haw SJ, Gruer L. Changes in exposure of adult non-smokers to secondhand smoke after implementation of smoke-free legislation in Scotland: national cross sectional survey. BMJ 2007;335:549-52.
    • 27 Wortman PM. An exemplary evaluation of a program that worked: the High/Scope Perry preschool project. Am J Eval 1995;16:257-65.
    • 28 Nazareth I, Freemantle N, Duggan C, Mason J, Haines A. Evaluation of a complex intervention for changing professional behaviour: the evidence based out reach (EBOR) trial. J Health Services Res Policy 2002;7:230-8.
    • 29 Freemantle N, Nazareth I, Eccles M, Wood J, Haines A, EBOR Triallists. A randomised controlled trial of the effect of educational outreach by community pharmacists on prescribing in UK general practice. Br J Gen Pract 2002;52:290-5.
    • 30 Hawe P, Shiell A, Riley T. Complex interventions: how “out of control” can a randomised trial be? BMJ 2004;328:1561-3.
    • 31 Farmer A, Wade A, Goyder E, Yudkin P, French D, Craven A, et al. Impact of self-monitoring of blood glucose in the management of patients with non-insulin treated diabetes: open parallel group randomised trial. BMJ 2007;335:132-9.
    • 32 Patton G, Bond L, Butler H, Glover S. Changing schools, changing health? Design and implementation of the Gatehouse Project. J Adolesc Health 2003;33:231-9.
    • 33 Abraham C, Michie S. A taxonomy of behavior change techniques used in interventions. Health Psychol 2008;27:379-87.
    • 34 Glasziou P, Meats E, Heneghan C, Shepperd S. What is missing from descriptions of treatments in trials and reviews? BMJ 2008;336:1472-4.
    • 35 Boutron I, Moher D, Altman D, Scultz K, Ravaud P. Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of non-pharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Int Med 2008;148:295- 309.
    • 36 Von Elm E, Altman D, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche P, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 2007;335:806-8.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article