ArticleJournal of diabetes investigation2012
Hemoglobin A1c for the diagnosis of diabetes: To replace or to guide oral glucose tolerance tests?
Article in Journal of diabetes investigation, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnosis of diabetes without oral glucose tolerance test is associated with increased mortality in older adults.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparison of the Current Diagnostic Criterion of HbA1c with Fasting and 2-Hour Plasma Glucose Concentration.Journal of diabetes research · 2016Article
- Effects of diabetes definition on global surveillance of diabetes prevalence and diagnosis: a pooled analysis of 96 population-based studies with 331,288 participants.The lancet. Diabetes & 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledAims/Introduction: To evaluate if hemoglobin A1c (A1C) can replace the use of the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) to diagnose diabetes in Chinese patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsSubjects without pre-existing diabetes were included in this community-based study. Each participant received a 75-g OGTT and A1C tests.
resultsA total of 1362 subjects, 512 men and 850 women, aged 18-88 years, were enrolled. The prevalence of diabetes was 7.4 and 7.3% by OGTT and by A1C ≥ 6.5% criteria, respectively. The optimal A1C cut-off for diabetes defined by OGTT was 6.1%. The performance of A1C ≥ 6.1% to find diabetes by OGTT was poor, with a kappa 0.50, sensitivity 80% and specificity 91%. Using current criteria of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) < 5.56 mmol/L to exclude and ≥7 mmol/L to diagnose diabetes (FPG criterion), the sensitivity, specificity and OGTT required were 77.2, 100 and 13.5%, respectively. Using A1C < 5.9% to exclude and ≥7.0% to diagnose diabetes (A1C criterion), the sensitivity, specificity and OGTT required were 89.1, 99.8 and 26.5%, respectively. However, using FPG < 5.56 mmol/L and A1C < 6.1% to exclude, and A1C ≥ 7.0% to diagnose diabetes (A1C plus FPG criterion), the sensitivity, specificity and OGTT required were 85.2, 100 and 18.9%, respectively.
conclusionsTo screen for diabetes, the A1C criterion is more sensitive than the FPG criterion, with more OGTT needed. The A1C plus FPG criterion reduced the number of OGTT needed with acceptable sensitivity. A1C can guide, but cannot replace, OGTT to diagnose diabetes. (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040-1124.2011.00181.x, 2011).
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.