Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27273908›Full record

ArticleDiabetes & metabolism journal2016

Comparison of the Usefulness of the Updated Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA2) with the Original HOMA1 in the Prediction of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Koreans.

Young Seok Song, You Cheol Hwang, Hong Yup Ahn, Cheol Young Park

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes & metabolism journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Young Seok SongDivision of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
You Cheol HwangDivision of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. khmcilyong@naver.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4033-7874
Hong Yup AhnDepartment of Statistics, Dongguk University, Seoul, Korea.
Cheol Young ParkDivision of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. cydoctor@chol.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9415-9965
Kangbuk Samsung Hospital · KRDongguk University · KRKyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe original homeostasis model assessment (HOMA1) and the updated HOMA model (HOMA2) have been used to evaluate insulin resistance (IR) and β-cell function, but little is known about the usefulness of HOMA2 for the prediction of diabetes in Koreans. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the usefulness of HOMA2 as a predictor of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Koreans without diabetes.

methodsThe study population consisted of 104,694 Koreans enrolled at a health checkup program and followed up from 2001 to 2012. Participants were divided into a normal glucose tolerance (NGT) group and a pre-diabetes group according to fasting glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin levels. Anthropometric and laboratory data were measured at the baseline checkup, and HOMA values were calculated at the baseline and follow-up checkups. The hazard ratios (HRs) of the HOMA1 and HOMA2 values and the prevalence of diabetes at follow-up were evaluated using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model and Kaplan-Meier analysis.

resultsAfter adjusting for several diabetes risk factors, all of the HOMA values except 1/HOMA1-β and 1/HOMA2-β in the NGT group were significant predictors of the progression to diabetes. In the NGT group, there was no significant difference in HOMA1-IR (HR, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.14) and HOMA2-IR (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.19). However, in the pre-diabetes group, 1/HOMA2-β was a more powerful marker (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.31) than HOMA1-IR (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.28) or 1/HOMA1-β (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.16). In the non-diabetic group (NGT+pre-diabetes), 1/HOMA2-β was also a stronger predictor of diabetes (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.25 to 1.29) than HOMA1-IR (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.15) or 1/HOMA1-β (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.14).

conclusionHOMA2 is more predictive than HOMA1 for the progression to diabetes in pre-diabetes or non-diabetic Koreans.

Indexed as

Homeostasis model assessment 1Homeostasis model assessment 2Insulin resistanceInsulin secretion

Identifiers

PMID27273908
PMCPMC4995187
OpenAlexW2411754124

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.