ArticleDiabetologia2012
How much does screening bring forward the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes and reduce complications? Twelve year follow-up of the Ely cohort.
Article in Diabetologia, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Glucose challenge test screening for prediabetes and early diabetes.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2017Trial
- Screening for type 2 diabetes and population mortality over 10 years (ADDITION-Cambridge): a cluster-randomised controlled trial.Lancet (London, England) · 2012Trial
- Effect of screening for Type 2 diabetes on population-level self-rated health outcomes and measures of cardiovascular risk: 13-year follow-up of the Ely cohort.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2012Trial
- Diabetes risk assessment in Polish community pharmacies. Results from a pilot national screening campaign.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2026Article
- Association of Screenings for Hypertension, Diabetes, and High Cholesterol With All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality: Evidence From a Cohort Study.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Article
- Exploring potential risk factors for lower limb amputation in people with diabetes-A national observational cohort study in Sweden.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2024Observational
- Incidence trend of type 2 diabetes from 2012 to 2021 in Germany: an analysis of health claims data of 11 million statutorily insured people.Diabetologia · 2024Article
- Multi-omic prediction of incident type 2 diabetes.Diabetologia · 2024Article
- Setting the agenda for diabetes research in the state of Qatar.Public health challenges · 2023Article
- Association of prior outpatient diabetes screening with cardiovascular events and mortality among people with incident diabetes: a population-based cohort study.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2023Article
- The impact of population-level HbADiabetologia · 2023Article
- A non-invasive risk score including skin autofluorescence predicts diabetes risk in the general population.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Screening for Diabetes and Prediabetes.Endocrinology and metabolism clinics of North America · 2021Review
- Integrating Genetics and the Plasma Proteome to Predict the Risk of Type 2 Diabetes.Current diabetes reports · 2020Review
- Diabetes Related Knowledge, Attitudes and Practice - A Survey Among Oral Health Professionals in Victoria, Australia.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry · 2020Article
- Opportunistic screening for type 2 diabetes in community pharmacies. Results from a region-wide experience in Italy.PloS one · 2020Article
- Diabetes Screening Through Community Pharmacies in England: A Cost-Effectiveness Study.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Article
- Screening for type 2 diabetes: do screen-detected cases fare better?Diabetologia · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThere are continuing uncertainties about how much screening for type 2 diabetes brings forward the clinical diagnosis and the impact that earlier diagnosis has on health outcomes. We compared the duration of diabetes and health outcomes in a population invited for diabetes screening at 5-yearly intervals from 1990 (screened population) with those in a similar population not invited for screening (unscreened population).
methodsThis was a parallel-group, cohort study of people aged 40-65 years, free of known diabetes, identified from the population register of a general practice in Ely, Cambridgeshire, UK (n = 4,936). In 1990-1992, one-third (n = 1,705), selected randomly, received an invitation for screening for diabetes and cardiovascular risk factors at 5-yearly intervals (screened population). From the remainder of the sampling frame, 1,705 randomly selected individuals were invited to diabetes screening 10 years later (unscreened population). Patients with diabetes from both populations were invited for a health assessment, including biochemical, anthropometric and questionnaire measures, and testing for the presence of diabetic complications
resultsOf the 199 eligible individuals with diabetes diagnosed during follow-up, 152 (76%) attended for health assessment. The median duration of clinically recognised diabetes was significantly longer in cases arising in the screened (5.0 years) compared with the unscreened population (1.7 years; p = 0.006). Clinical measures, prescribed medication and functional status were similar between screened and unscreened populations.
conclusionsDiabetes screening resulted in cases being identified on average 3.3 years earlier, a difference significantly shorter than previous estimates. Earlier diagnosis did not appear to impact on health outcomes. Further evidence is needed to justify the introduction of population-based screening.
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.