Observational studyBMJ open2014
The future of population registers: linking routine health datasets to assess a population's current glycaemic status for quality improvement.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic testing for misclassified monogenic diabetes in Māori and Pacific peoples in Aōtearoa New Zealand with early-onset type 2 diabetes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Insulin use and new diabetes after acceptance for bariatric surgery: comparison of outcomes after completion of surgery or withdrawal from the program.BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2020Article
- Adherence to daily dietary and activity goals set within a Māori and Pacific weight loss competition.BMC obesity · 2019Article
- Prevalence of parkinsonism estimated using the drug prescription archive: a possible method to estimate the prevalence of a chronic neurological disease?Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2016Article
- Methods and initial findings from the Durham Diabetes Coalition: Integrating geospatial health technology and community interventions to reduce death and disability.Journal of clinical & translational endocrinology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the diabetes screening levels and known glycaemic status of all individuals by age, gender and ethnicity within a defined geographic location in a timely and consistent way to potentially facilitate systematic disease prevention and management.
designRetrospective observational study.
settingAuckland region of New Zealand.
participants1 475 347 people who had utilised publicly funded health service in New Zealand and domicile in the Auckland region of New Zealand in 2010. The health service utilisation population was individually linked to a comprehensive regional laboratory repository dating back to 2004. OUTCOME MEASURES: The two outcomes measures were glycaemia-related blood testing coverage (glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting and random glucose and glucose tolerance tests), and the proportions and number of people with known dysglycaemia in 2010 using modified American Diabetes Association (ADA) and WHO criteria.
resultsWithin the health service utilisation population, 792 560 people had had at least one glucose or HbA1c blood test in the previous 5.5 years. Overall, 81% of males (n=198 086) and 87% of females (n=128 982) in the recommended age groups for diabetes screening had a blood test to assess their glycaemic status. The estimated age-standardised prevalence of dysglycaemia was highest in people of Pacific Island ethnicity at 11.4% (95% CI 11.2% to 11.5%) for males and 11.6% (11.4% to 11.8%) for females, followed closely by people of Indian ethnicity at 10.8% (10.6% to 11.1%) and 9.3% (9.1% to 9.6%), respectively. Among the indigenous Maori population, the prevalence was 8.2% (7.9% to 8.4%) and 7% (6.8% to 7.2%), while for 'Others' (mainly Europeans) it was 3% (3% to 3.1%) and 2.2% (2.1% to 2.2%), respectively.
conclusionsWe have demonstrated that the data linkage between a laboratory repository and national administrative datasets has the potential to provide a systematic and consistent individual level clinical information that is relevant to medical auditing for a large geographically defined population.
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.