ArticleAtencion primaria2001
[Do the new criteria of the American Diabetes Association lead to earlier diagnosis of type-2 diabetes mellitus?].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Glycated haemoglobin for the diagnosis of diabetes. A universal standard?].Atencion primaria · 2010Article
- [Pre-diabetes in primary care: diagnosis... and treatment?].Atencion primaria · 2006Review
- [What is diabetics' real cardiovascular risk?].Atencion primaria · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze the period of time between the first occasional fasting hyperglycaemia (OFH) and the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2), using the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria or the American Diabetes Association (ADA) criteria.
designRetrospective, observational study.
settingUrban primary care centre. SUBJECTS: 104 patients with DM2 diagnosed between 1991 and 1995 who had a previous OFH. MEASUREMENTS: Age, gender and other risk factors, dates of the first OFH (fasting plasma glucose >= 110 mg/dl), the diagnosis according to WHO criteria (2 fasting plasma glucose >= 140 mg/dl or >= 200 mg/dl two hours after the oral glucose test tolerance (OGTT)) or with the ADA criteria (2 fasting plasma glucose >= 126 mg/dl), and the intervals in months between them.
resultsOf the 222 diagnosed patients, 104 (47%) had previous OFH. Age at diagnosis was 60.8 (SD 10.1) and 53% were women. OGTT was performed in 51 cases (49%). The median (range) of the interval between the first OFH and diagnosis was 16 months (0-101) for those who were undertaken an OGTT, and 45 months (1-104) for those who were not (p = 0.003). In these last ones, ADA criteria reduced the interval to 31 months (0-97) (p < 0.001). In 27 of these patients who did not satisfy both criteria at the same time, ADA criteria reduced the interval to 10 months (0-93) (p < 0.001).
conclusionsNot performing the OGTT means a delay in diagnosis which can be countered by applying the ADA criteria.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.