Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24040326›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2013

Incidence of type 2 diabetes in Japan: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Atsushi Goto, Maki Goto, Mitsuhiko Noda, Shoichiro Tsugane

Erratum issuedAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Incidence of fractures among patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Incidence and Risk Factors for Progression to Diabetes Mellitus: A Retrospective Cohort Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Atsushi GotoDepartment of Diabetes Research, Diabetes Research Center, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Maki Goto
Mitsuhiko Noda
Shoichiro Tsugane

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe definition of incident type 2 diabetes varies across studies; hence, the actual incidence of type 2 diabetes in Japan is unclear. Here, we reviewed the various definitions of incident type 2 diabetes used in previous epidemiologic studies and estimated the diabetes incidence rate in Japan.

methodsWe searched for related literature in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ichushi databases through September 2012. Two reviewers selected studies that evaluated incident type 2 diabetes in the Japanese population.

resultsFrom 1824 relevant articles, we included 33 studies with 386,803 participants. The follow-up period ranged from 2.3 to 14 years and the studies were initiated between 1980 and 2003. The random-effects model indicated that the pooled incidence rate of diabetes was 8.8 (95% confidence interval, 7.4-10.4) per 1000 person-years. We observed a high degree of heterogeneity in the results (I(2) = 99.2%; p < 0.001), with incidence rates ranging from 2.3 to 52.6 per 1000 person-years. Three studies based their definition of incident type 2 diabetes on self-reports only, 10 on laboratory data only, and 20 on self-reports and laboratory data. Compared with studies defining diabetes using laboratory data (n = 30; pooled incidence rate = 9.6; 95% confidence interval = 8.3-11.1), studies based on self-reports alone tended to show a lower incidence rate (n = 3; pooled incidence rate = 4.0; 95% confidence interval = 3.2-5.0; p for interaction < 0.001). However, stratified analyses could not entirely explain the heterogeneity in the results.

conclusionsOur systematic review and meta-analysis indicated the presence of a high degree of heterogeneity, which suggests that there is a considerable amount of uncertainty regarding the incidence of type 2 diabetes in Japan. They also suggested that laboratory data may be important for the accurate estimation of the incidence of type 2 diabetes.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansJapanModels, StatisticalPoisson Distribution

Identifiers

PMID24040326
PMCPMC3765408

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.