Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18543044›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2008

Value of risk stratification to increase the predictive validity of HbA1c in screening for undiagnosed diabetes in the US population.

Adit A Ginde, Enrico Cagliero, David M Nathan, Carlos A Camargo

Open access · bronzeAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Hemoglobin A1c testing in an emergency department.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2011
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Adit A GindeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Aurora, CO 80045, USA. adit.ginde@uchsc.edu
Enrico Cagliero
David M Nathan
Carlos A Camargo
Massachusetts General Hospital · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOpportunistic screening using hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) may improve detection of undiagnosed diabetes but remains controversial.

objectiveTo evaluate the predictive validity of HbA1c as a screening test for undiagnosed diabetes in a risk-stratified sample of the US population.

designWeighted cross-sectional analysis of diabetes risk factors, HbA1c, and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 1999-2004. SUBJECTS: Six thousand seven hundred and twenty-three NHANES participants from morning examination session, aged > or = 18 years and without prior physician-diagnosed diabetes. MEASUREMENTS: HbA1c and undiagnosed diabetes defined by FPG > or = 7.0 mmol/l (126 mg/dl).

resultsThe estimated prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes in the US population was 2.8% (5.5 million people). HbA1c had strong correlation with undiagnosed diabetes, with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.93. Independent predictors of undiagnosed diabetes were older age, male sex, black race, hypertension, elevated waist circumference, elevated triglycerides, and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. We derived a risk score for undiagnosed diabetes and stratified participants into low (0.44% prevalence), moderate (4.1% prevalence), and high (11.1% prevalence) risk subgroups. In moderate and high risk groups, a threshold HbA1c value > or = 6.1% identified patients requiring confirmatory FPG; HbA1c < or = 5.4% identified patients for whom diabetes could be reliably excluded. Intermediate HbA1c (5.5-6.0%) may exclude diabetes in moderate, but not high risk groups).

conclusionsRisk stratification improves the predictive validity of HbA1c in screening for undiagnosed diabetes in the US population. Although opportunistic screening with HbA1c would improve detection of undiagnosed diabetes, cost-effectiveness studies are needed before implementation of specific screening strategies using HbA1c.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningAdolescentAdultAgedBlood GlucoseDiabetes MellitusFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHealth Status IndicatorsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNutrition SurveysPredictive Value of TestsPrevalenceUnited StatesBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobin

Identifiers

PMID18543044
PMCPMC2517991
OpenAlexW2000579184

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.