Disparities in Diabetes Care: Differences Between Rural and Urban Patients Within a Large Health System

Randy Foss; Karen Fischer; Michelle A. Lampman; Susan Laabs; Michael Halasy; Summer V. Allen; Gregory M. Garrison; Gerald Sobolik; Matthew Bernard; Jessica Sosso; Tom D. Thacher

doi:10.1370/afm.2962

Published eLetters

If you would like to comment on this article, click on Submit a Response to This article, below. We welcome your input.

Submit a Response to This Article

Compose eLetter

Title *

Author Information

Contributors
First Name and Middle Initial * First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'. Last Name * Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'. Email Address * Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com Occupation * Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'. Affiliation * Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.

Statement of Competing Interests

Competing interests? *

Yes

Please describe the competing interests

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

What code is in the image? *

Enter the characters shown in the image.

Vertical Tabs

Jump to comment:

RE:
Jaisingh Rajput and Prajakta Rajput

Published on: 31 December 2023

Published on: (31 December 2023)
Page navigation anchor for RE:
RE:
Jaisingh Rajput, Family Medicine physician MD, ABFM
Other Contributors:
Prajakta Rajput, Family Physician MD.
Positive Review Points:

1. The study benefits from a large cohort of 45,279 patients, enhancing the statistical power and reliability of the findings. The retrospective cohort design allows for the examination of factors associated with the quality of diabetes care over a substantial timeframe, providing a comprehensive understanding of rural-urban disparities.

2. The use of the D5 metric, with its well-defined components related to diabetes care, provides a clear and standardized measure for assessing the quality of care. This approach facilitates comparability across rural and urban settings, aiding in the identification of specific areas where improvements may be needed.

3. The inclusion of various covariates such as age, sex, race, and adjusted clinical group (ACG) score strengthens the study's ability to control for potential confounding factors. Additionally, the acknowledgment of patients being part of the same integrated health system ensures a more accurate comparison between rural and urban groups, minimizing systemic variations.

Negative Review Points:

1. While the study identifies rural-urban disparities in diabetes care quality, it lacks a detailed exploration of specific challenges faced by rural patients. Understanding the unique barriers in rural settings could provide more targeted insights and inform interventions tailored to address the specific needs of these populations.

2. The study reports an association...
Show More

Positive Review Points:

1. The study benefits from a large cohort of 45,279 patients, enhancing the statistical power and reliability of the findings. The retrospective cohort design allows for the examination of factors associated with the quality of diabetes care over a substantial timeframe, providing a comprehensive understanding of rural-urban disparities.

2. The use of the D5 metric, with its well-defined components related to diabetes care, provides a clear and standardized measure for assessing the quality of care. This approach facilitates comparability across rural and urban settings, aiding in the identification of specific areas where improvements may be needed.

3. The inclusion of various covariates such as age, sex, race, and adjusted clinical group (ACG) score strengthens the study's ability to control for potential confounding factors. Additionally, the acknowledgment of patients being part of the same integrated health system ensures a more accurate comparison between rural and urban groups, minimizing systemic variations.

Negative Review Points:

1. While the study identifies rural-urban disparities in diabetes care quality, it lacks a detailed exploration of specific challenges faced by rural patients. Understanding the unique barriers in rural settings could provide more targeted insights and inform interventions tailored to address the specific needs of these populations.

2. The study reports an association between having an endocrinology visit and a lower likelihood of meeting the D5 metric. However, the study does not establish causation, and a more in-depth analysis of the reasons behind this association is necessary to inform actionable strategies for improvement.

3.The study includes covariates such as age, sex, and race but does not explicitly mention socioeconomic factors, which could play a significant role in diabetes care outcomes. A more comprehensive examination of socioeconomic determinants might enhance the understanding of disparities and guide targeted interventions.
Show Less

Competing Interests: None declared.