Research presentation

Author

Journal

Name/ Year of Publication

Research Design

Sample Size

Outcome Variables Measured

Quality

(A, B, C)

Results/Author’s Suggested Conclusion

Kamlesh Khunti

ORCID et. al

Diabetes Care/2023 Volume 46 Issue 12

Systematic Review: Analysis of 566 studies on MLTC.

Quantitative: Delphi method to define MLTC.

Qualitative: Data from various populations and settings.

Mixed Method: Evaluating system delivery, lifestyle, and therapeutic interventions

566 participants

Prevalence and Incidence: Tracking the occurrence of MLTC in diabetes patients.

Healthcare

Utilization: Assessing hospital admissions, emergency department visits, and primary care consultations.

Health-Related Quality of Life: Evaluating the impact of MLTC on patients’ well-being.

Mortality: Studying the association between MLTC and mortality risk.

Healthcare Costs: Analyzing the economic burden of MLTC in diabetes management.

Prevalence and Incidence: I would assign this an “A” grade. The tracking of MLTC occurrence in diabetes patients is crucial and well-established.

Healthcare Utilization: I’d give this a “B”. While important, it requires more nuanced analysis beyond basic tracking.

Health-Related Quality of Life: This deserves an “A”.

Understanding patient well-being is critical for holistic care.

Mortality: I’d rate this as an “A-”. It’s significant, but complexities exist.

--Healthcare Costs: I’d assign an “A” here. Analyzing economic burden is essential for policy decisions.

Rising Prevalence: The number of people with diabetes and MLTC is increasing globally, with significant implications for health care services and patient outcomes.

Challenges: MLTC leads to fragmented care, polypharmacy, poor quality of life, and higher mortality rates12.

Interventions Needed: Effective system delivery, care coordination, lifestyle interventions, and therapeutic interventions are crucial for managing MLTC.

Research Directions: Future research should focus on developing robust evidence-based interventions to improve the lives of people with MLTC and build cost-effective health care systems

Christine Kim, PhD, MSPH, et. al

Federal Housing Assistance and Chronic Disease Among US Adults, 2005–2018

Volume 20 — November 30, 2023

The article uses a quantitative research design. It analyzes data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) administrative records to estimate the prevalence of chronic conditions and assess associations between housing assistance and these conditions among adults1. The study employs statistical methods, including propensity-score weighting, to control for potential confounders and ensure comparability between groups.

The study included 2,363 HUD-assisted adults and 13,755 HUD-unassisted adults with an income-to-poverty ratio (IPR) less than 21. This data was collected from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) between 2005 and 2018

The article measures the following outcome variables:

Obesity: Defined as a body mass index (BMI) of 30.0 or more.

Diabetes: Identified through self-reported diagnosis or a hemoglobin A1c level of 6.5% or more.

Hypertension: Defined by systolic blood pressure ≥130 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure ≥80 mm Hg, or self-reported use of hypertension medication.

These variables were assessed to understand the prevalence of chronic conditions among adults receiving HUD assistance compared to those eligible but not receiving assistance

The study found that adults receiving HUD assistance had a higher prevalence of obesity compared to those eligible but not receiving assistance. However, there were no significant differences for diabetes or hypertension. Given these mixed results, I would assign a “C” grade to the outcome variable measured. This reflects the study’s partial success in identifying significant associations, but also acknowledges the limitations and lack of significant findings for some conditions.

Higher Obesity Rates: Adults receiving HUD assistance had a higher prevalence of obesity (47.5%) compared to those not receiving assistance (42.1%).

No Significant Differences: There were no significant differences in the prevalence of diabetes and hypertension between the two groups.

Associations with Obesity: Housing assistance was significantly associated with higher odds of obesity, but not with diabetes or hypertension.

Informing Future Research: The study’s findings can help inform future research on chronic disease prevalence among adults receiving housing assistance

Felicia Hill-Briggs et. al

SCIENTIFIC REVIEW NOVEMBER 2, 2020

Social Determinants of Health and Diabetes: A Scientific Revie

The research design of this study is a systematic review. It summarizes literature on the range of social determinants of health (SDOH) identified as having an impact on diabetes outcomes, drawing from systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and more recent published studies

The current page does not specify a single study with a sample size. Instead, it reviews multiple studies and frameworks related to social determinants of health (SDOH) and diabetes

The study measures several outcome variables related to diabetes and social determinants of health (SDOH):

Diabetes Prevalence and Incidence: Rates of diabetes in different socioeconomic and demographic groups.

Diabetes-Related Mortality: Risk of death due to diabetes across various income and education levels.

Glycemic Control: HbA1c levels, indicating blood sugar control.

Health Care Utilization: Frequency of emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and outpatient services for diabetes management.

These variables help understand the impact of SDOH on diabetes outcomes

Prevalence and Incidence: I would assign this an “A”. Tracking MLTC occurrence in diabetes patients is crucial and well-established.

Healthcare Utilization: I’d give this a “B”. While important, it requires more nuanced analysis beyond basic tracking.

Health-Related Quality of Life: This deserves an “A”. Understanding patient well-being is critical for holistic care.

Mortality: I’d rate this as an “A-”. It’s significant, but complexities exist.

Healthcare Costs: I’d assign an “A” here. Analyzing economic burden is essential for policy decisions.

Here are the key takeaways from the commentary on diabetes and social determinants of health (SDOH):

Disproportionate Impact: Diabetes disproportionately affects racial and ethnic minorities and low-income populations in the U.S., with higher risks and complications.

SDOH Importance: Addressing SDOH is crucial for achieving health equity, especially in diabetes, due to its prevalence and economic costs.

Frameworks and Definitions: Various frameworks, including WHO and Healthy People 2020, classify SDOH factors like socioeconomic status, neighborhood environment, food access, health care, and social context.

--Recommendations: The article concludes with recommendations for linking health care and community sectors, and for further research to inform practice.

National Institutes of Health

Department of Health and Human Services

November 29, 2023

Mixed method evaluating aimed at optimizing care for persons with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) from populations experiencing health disparities.

The current page does not specify the sample size for the study. It focuses on the funding opportunity announcement and guidelines for research projects related to multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) in populations experiencing health disparities

Part of the current page talks about the outcome variables measured in the context of clinical trials and research projects. Here are the key points:

--Primary and Secondary Outcome Variables: These should be clear, informative, and relevant to the hypothesis being tested.

--Health Outcomes: Includes reduction of preventable complications, prevention of hospitalizations or readmissions, improved quality of life, and proactive health care delivery.

--Patient-Centered Goals: Personal health outcomes that patients hope to achieve, such as physical/mental function, independence, well-being, and life expectancy.

Cost and Quality of Care: Changes in outcomes such as cost, quality, access, or care coordination for people with multiple chronic conditions.

“A” The current page provides detailed information about a funding opportunity announcement (FOA) from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). It outlines the objectives, eligibility, application process, and specific areas of interest for research projects focused on optimizing care for persons with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) from populations experiencing health disparities

The current page outlines a funding opportunity announcement (FOA) from the NIH, focusing on research to optimize care for individuals with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) from populations experiencing health disparities.

--Research Focus: The initiative supports innovative, multidisciplinary research to integrate and implement evidence-based care guidelines for MCCs.

--Health Disparities: Emphasis on populations experiencing health disparities, including racial/ethnic minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups.

--Health Care Models: Encourages the use of existing or new health care models to achieve optimal health outcomes.

--Funding and Eligibility: Details on application requirements, eligibility, and submission guidelines for potential applicants.