ArticleIranian journal of public health2014
Predictive Power for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus using Dynamic Change of Metabolic Syndrome, Dynamic Change of Fasting Plasma Glucose, Metabolic Syndrome and Fasting Plasma Glucose.
Article in Iranian journal of public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gender differences in the impact of 3-year status changes of metabolic syndrome and its components on incident type 2 diabetes mellitus: a decade of follow-up in the Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Metabolic Syndrome and Its Components Predict the Risk of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the Mainland Chinese: A 3-Year Cohort Study.International journal of endocrinology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim was to compare the predictive power for Type 2 Diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using dynamic change (Difference) of metabolic syndrome (MS), Difference of fasting plasma glucose (FPG), baseline MS and FPG in cohort study.
methodsOverall, 3461 subjects were recruited from Prevention of Multiple Metabolic disorders and MS in Jiangsu of China Study with 3.8 years follow-up. Cox proportional-hazards regression and receiver operating characteristic were used to evaluate the predictive power for T2DM using Difference MS, Difference of FPG, baseline MS and FPG.
resultsAdjusted relative risk (aRR 5.24, 95% CI 4.28-6.42) of Difference of FPG to T2DM was highest than other. Difference of FPG owns the largest AUC (0.89, P<0.05), the highest sensitivity (96.25%) and specificity (80.49%) demonstrating that Difference of FPG can provide strongest predictive information to T2DM, Difference of MS comes second. Between FPG related tools, sensitivity of Difference of FPG almost was twice than baseline FPG(96.25% vs. 54.38%) suggesting that using baseline FPG would missed found 46% T2DM patients. Among MS related indicators, sensitivity of Difference of MS almost was twice than baseline MS (sensitivity 66.25% vs. 39.38%) suggesting that using baseline would missed found 61% T2DM patients.
conclusionDynamic change of FPG had the highest predictive power for T2DM in Chinese than Dynamic Change of MS, baseline MS and FPG.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26005653PMC4433724W2160153215What 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.