2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2015.05.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

ROOTS: A multicenter study in Belgium to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of liraglutide (Victoza®) in type 2 diabetic patients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

11
20
2
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
11
20
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The majority of the studies assessed the clinical effectiveness of liraglutide without an active comparator (81.4%; N  = 35) [28, 29, 31, 34, 3639, 41–49, 5155, 57, 6064, 66–71]. Real-world studies with comparators were less frequently observed (18.6%; N  = 8); the most common comparators for liraglutide were: sitagliptin or any DPP-4i ( N  = 6) [32, 33, 35, 40, 56, 58], exenatide ( N  = 3) [33, 35, 50], glimepiride or any other SUs ( N  = 2) [30, 35], pioglitazone or other TZDs ( N  = 1) [35], and MET ( N  = 1) [35]; note: these numbers do not add up because some studies had more than one comparator.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…The majority of the studies assessed the clinical effectiveness of liraglutide without an active comparator (81.4%; N  = 35) [28, 29, 31, 34, 3639, 41–49, 5155, 57, 6064, 66–71]. Real-world studies with comparators were less frequently observed (18.6%; N  = 8); the most common comparators for liraglutide were: sitagliptin or any DPP-4i ( N  = 6) [32, 33, 35, 40, 56, 58], exenatide ( N  = 3) [33, 35, 50], glimepiride or any other SUs ( N  = 2) [30, 35], pioglitazone or other TZDs ( N  = 1) [35], and MET ( N  = 1) [35]; note: these numbers do not add up because some studies had more than one comparator.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Study attributes and patient baseline characteristics from the included studies are provided in supplementary file 2. Of the 38 full-text publications, 18 studies reported an average follow-up duration of ≥12 months [2933, 3640, 42–47], followed by 15 studies with an average follow-up period of ≥6–12 months [34, 48, 49, 5260, 62, 73]. The remaining five studies had an average follow-up period of ≤6 months [64, 66, 67, 69, 70].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations