Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18257922›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2008

Informing patients of familial diabetes mellitus risk: How do they respond? A cross-sectional survey.

Nadeem Qureshi, Joe Kai

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Family history assessment: impact on disease risk perceptions.American journal of preventive medicine · 2012
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Understanding the Process of Family Cancer History Collection and Health Information Seeking.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. All things considered, my risk for diabetes is medium: A risk personalization process of familial risk for type 2 diabetes.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 'Over-the-counter' genetic testing: what does it really mean for primary care?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2009
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Nadeem QureshiDivision of Primary Care, School of Graduate Entry Medicine and Health, University of Nottingham, Derby City General Hospital, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3DT, UK. nadeem.qureshi@nottingham.ac.uk
Joe Kai

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA strong family history of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) confers increased DM risk. This survey analysis determined whether patients who were informed by their doctors of familial DM risk acknowledged that risk and took steps to reduce it.

methodsWe conducted an analysis of the National Health Styles 2004 mail survey. All non-diabetic participants who responded to the question of whether their doctor had or had not informed them of their familial DM risk (n = 3,323) were compared for their risk-reducing behaviour and attitude to DM risk.

resultsForty-one percent (n = 616) of the question responders that had DM family histories were informed by their doctors of their familial risk; the chance of being informed increased with the number of relatives that had the disease. Members of the informed group were more likely than those in the non-informed group to report lifestyle changes to prevent DM (odds ratio [OR] 4.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.5-5.2) and being tested for DM (OR 2.9, 95% CI 2.4-3.6), although no significant improvement occurred in their U.S.-recommended exercise activity (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.7-1.1). Overall, informed responders recognised both their familial and personal DM risk; most discussed diabetes with their family (69%), though less so with friends (42%); however, 44% of them still did not consider themselves to be at risk.

conclusionResponders who were informed by their doctors of being at familial DM risk reported greater incidences of lifestyle changes, DM screening, and awareness of risk than non-informed responders. Doctors were more likely to inform patients with stronger DM family histories. Identifying this higher risk group, either in isolation or in combination with other recognised risk factors, offers doctors the opportunity to target limited health promotion resources efficiently for primary DM prevention.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthFamily HealthRisk Reduction BehaviorAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHealth BehaviorHealth SurveysHumansLife StyleMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID18257922
PMCPMC2275238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.