David Simmons

Prof. David Simmons

Macarthur Clinical School, Western Sydney University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

44Years (1983-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
20 June 2024 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ASArianne Sweeting
Arianne Sweeting
WHWesley Hannah
Wesley Hannah
HBHelena Backman
Helena Backman
PCPatrick Catalano
Patrick Catalano
MFMaisa Feghali
Maisa Feghali
KBKatrien Benhalima
Katrien Benhalima

1 July 1998 in Medical Journal of Australia
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
LHLinda Hoffman
Linda Hoffman
CNChris Nolan
Chris Nolan
JWJ Dennis Wilson
J Dennis Wilson
JOJeremy J N Oats
Jeremy J N Oats
David SimmonsDavid Simmons
David Simmons
Click on the article title to read more.

8 June 2023 in New England Journal of Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
David SimmonsDavid Simmons
David Simmons
JIJincy Immanuel
Jincy Immanuel
WHWilliam M. Hague
William M. Hague
HTHelena Teede
Helena Teede
CNChristopher Nolan
Christopher Nolan
NCN. Wah Cheung
N. Wah Cheung
Whether treatment of gestational diabetes before 20 weeks' gestation improves maternal and infant health is unclear. We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, women between 4 weeks' and 19 weeks 6 days' gestation who had a risk factor for hyperglycemia and a diagnosis of gestational diabetes (World Health Organization 2013 criteria) to receive immediate treatment for gestational diabetes or deferred or no treatment, depending on the results of a repeat oral glucose-tolerance test [OGTT] at 24 to 28 weeks' gestation (control). The trial included three primary outcomes: a composite of adverse neonatal outcomes (birth at <37 weeks' gestation, birth trauma, birth weight of ≥4500 g, respiratory distress, phototherapy, stillbirth or neonatal death, or shoulder dystocia), pregnancy-related hypertension (preeclampsia, eclampsia, or gestational hypertension), and neonatal lean body mass. A total of 802 women underwent randomization; 406 were assigned to the immediate-treatment group and 396 to the control group; follow-up data were available for 793 women (98.9%). An initial OGTT was performed at a mean (±SD) gestation of 15.6±2.5 weeks. An adverse neonatal outcome event occurred in 94 of 378 women (24.9%) in the immediate-treatment group and in 113 of 370 women (30.5%) in the control group (adjusted risk difference, -5.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -10.1 to -1.2). Pregnancy-related hypertension occurred in 40 of 378 women (10.6%) in the immediate-treatment group and in 37 of 372 women (9.9%) in the control group (adjusted risk difference, 0.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.6 to 2.9). The mean neonatal lean body mass was 2.86 g in the immediate-treatment group and 2.91 g in the control group (adjusted mean difference, -0.04 g; 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.02). No between-group differences were observed with respect to serious adverse events associated with screening and treatment. Immediate treatment of gestational diabetes before 20 weeks' gestation led to a modestly lower incidence of a composite of adverse neonatal outcomes than no immediate treatment; no material differences were observed for pregnancy-related hypertension or neonatal lean body mass. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council and others; TOBOGM Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12616000924459.).

19 June 2012 in Diabetic Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
BBB. S. Buckley
B. S. Buckley
JHJürgen Harreiter
Jürgen Harreiter
PDPeter Damme
Peter Damme
RCR. Corcoy
R. Corcoy
ACA. Chico
A. Chico
OGon behalf of the DALI Core Investigator Group
on behalf of the DALI Core Investigator Group

20 June 2024 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MHMarie-France Hivert
Marie-France Hivert
HBHelena Backman
Helena Backman
KBKatrien Benhalima
Katrien Benhalima
PCPatrick Catalano
Patrick Catalano
GDGernot Desoye
Gernot Desoye
AJAlicia Jawerbaum
Alicia Jawerbaum

1 April 2006 in Diabetes Care
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
GPGretchen A. Piatt
Gretchen A. Piatt
TOTrevor J. Orchard
Trevor J. Orchard
SESharlene Emerson
Sharlene Emerson
David SimmonsDavid Simmons
David Simmons
TSThomas J. Songer
Thomas J. Songer
JZJanice C. Zgibor
Janice C. Zgibor
OBJECTIVE—To determine whether using the chronic care model (CCM) in an underserved community leads to improved clinical and behavioral outcomes for people with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—This multilevel, cluster-design, randomized controlled trial examined the effectiveness of a CCM-based intervention in an underserved urban community. Eleven primary care practices, along with their patients, were randomized to three groups: CCM intervention (n = 30 patients), provider education only (PROV group) (n = 38), and usual care (UC group) (n = 51). RESULTS—A marked decline in HbA1c was observed in the CCM group (−0.6%, P = 0.008) but not in the other groups. The magnitude of the association remained strong after adjustment for clustering (P = 0.01). The same pattern was observed for a decline in non-HDL cholesterol and for the proportion of participants who self-monitor blood glucose in the CCM group (non-HDL cholesterol: −10.4 mg/dl, P = 0.24; self-monitor blood glucose: +22.2%, P < 0.0001), with statistically significant between-group differences in improvement (non-HDL cholesterol: P = 0.05; self-monitor blood glucose: P = 0.03) after adjustment. The CCM group also showed improvement in HDL cholesterol (+5.5 mg/dl, P = 0.0004), diabetes knowledge test scores (+6.7%, P = 0.07), and empowerment scores (+2, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS—These results suggest that implementing the CCM in the community is effective in improving clinical and behavioral outcomes in patients with diabetes.