ArticlePublic health nutrition2016
Diabetes diagnosis and nutrition facts label use among US adults, 2005-2010.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of dietary inflammatory index in the association of NT-proBNP with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in NHANES 1999-2004.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Utilization of nutrition labels and related factors among patients with diabetes in Korea.Nutrition research and practice · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Reading the Nutritional Information on Food Labels Among Teachers with and without Hypertension in Brazil.International journal of preventive medicine · 2019Article
- Nutrition information and front-of-pack labelling: issues in effectiveness.Public health nutrition · 2016Article
- Diabetes Diagnosis and Screen-Based Sedentary Behavior Among US Adults.American journal of lifestyle medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the role of diabetes diagnosis as a potential teachable moment in nutrition facts label use among US adults.
designLogistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between diabetes diagnosis status (diagnosed diabetes, undiagnosed diabetes, diagnosed prediabetes, undiagnosed prediabetes, no diabetes or prediabetes) and self-reported nutrition facts label use, adjusted by individual characteristics and survey design.
settingStudy sample came from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2010 waves. SUBJECTS: A total of 5110 US adults aged 20 years and older were included in the analyses. Diabetes/prediabetes was identified by fasting plasma glucose and glycated Hb testing.
resultsPeople with diagnosed diabetes/prediabetes were substantially more likely to report nutrition facts label use when making daily food purchase decisions compared with those with undiagnosed diabetes/prediabetes, whereas the prevalence of nutrition facts label use was similar between people with undiagnosed diabetes/prediabetes and those without diabetes/prediabetes. The adjusted prevalence (95 % CI) of any and regular nutrition facts label use was 85·93 (82·91, 88·95) % and 55·60 (50·04, 61·16) % among those with diagnosed diabetes, respectively, in comparison to 71·50 (59·64, 83·37) % and 32·88 (19·11, 46·65) % among those with undiagnosed diabetes. Analogously, the adjusted prevalence (95 % CI) of any and regular nutrition facts label use was 81·16 (75·27, 87·06) % and 45·28 (37·28, 53·29) % among those with diagnosed prediabetes, respectively, in comparison to 72·83 (68·06, 77·59) % and 39·95 (34·02, 45·89) % among those with undiagnosed prediabetes.
conclusionsAs a potential teachable moment, diabetes diagnosis may positively impact nutrition facts label use and motivate diabetic patients to manage their condition through making healthier food choices.
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.