Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23319502›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of family medicine

Vascular outcomes in patients with screen-detected or clinically diagnosed type 2 diabetes: Diabscreen study follow-up.

Erwin P Klein Woolthuis, Wim J C de Grauw, Susanne M van Keeken, Reinier P Akkermans, Eloy H van de Lisdonk, Job F M Metsemakers, Chris van Weel

Open access · diamondAbstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Erwin P Klein WoolthuisDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Centre for Family Medicine, Geriatric Care and Public Health, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, The Netherlands. e.kleinwoolthuis@elg.umcn.nl
Wim J C de Grauw
Susanne M van Keeken
Reinier P Akkermans
Eloy H van de Lisdonk
Job F M Metsemakers
Chris van Weel
Radboud University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLMaastricht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeScreening guidelines for type 2 diabetes recommend targeting high-risk individuals. Our objective was to assess whether diagnosis of type 2 diabetes based on opportunistic targeted screening results in lower vascular event rates compared with diagnosis on the basis of clinical signs or symptoms.

methodsIn a prospective, nonrandomized, observational study, we enrolled patients aged 45 to 75 years from 10 family practices in the Netherlands with a new diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, detected either by (1) opportunistic targeted screening (n = 359) or (2) clinical signs or symptoms (n = 206). Patients in both groups received the same guideline-concordant diabetes care. The main group outcome measure was a composite of death from cardiovascular disease (CVD), nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke.

resultsBaseline vascular disease was more prevalent in the opportunistic targeted screening group, mainly ischemic heart disease (12.3% vs 3.9%, P = .001) and nephropathy (16.9% vs 7.1%, P = .002). After a mean follow-up of 7.7 years (SD = 2.4 years) and 7.1 years (SD = 2.7 years) for the opportunistic targeted screening and clinical diagnosis groups, respectively, composite primary event rates did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (9.5% vs 10.2%, P = .78; adjusted hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval, 0.36-1.25; P = .21). There were also no significant differences in the separate event rates of deaths from CVD, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal strokes.

conclusionsOpportunistic targeted screening for type 2 diabetes detected patients with higher CVD morbidity at baseline when compared with clinical diagnosis but showed similar CVD mortality and major CVD morbidity after 7.7 years. Opportunistic targeted screening and guided care appears to improve vascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes in primary care.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningAgedCardiovascular DiseasesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Diabetic AngiopathiesFamily PracticeFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionNetherlandsOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareProportional Hazards ModelsProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID23319502
PMCPMC3596031
OpenAlexW2148569088

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.