ArticleSystematic reviews2016
Incidence, prevalence and genetic determinants of neonatal diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Case report: Better late than never, but sooner is better: switch from CSII to sulfonylureas in two patients with neonatal diabetes due to KCNJ11 variants.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Article
- Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio predicts prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2021Article
- Transient Neonatal Diabetes Mellitus with the Rare Association of Nonsuppurative Sialadenitis and Genetic Defects in 6q24.Case reports in pediatrics · 2021Article
- Genetic Spectrum of Neonatal Diabetes.Balkan journal of medical genetics : BJMG · 2020Article
- Recent Advances in Neonatal Diabetes.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2020Review
- Neonatal hyperglycemia induces cell death in the rat brain.Metabolic brain disease · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the absence of existing data, the present review intends to determine the incidence, prevalence and/or genetic determinants of neonatal diabetes mellitus (NDM), with expected contribution to disease characterization.
methodsWe will include cross-sectional, cohort or case-control studies which have reported the incidence, prevalence and/or genetic determinants of NDM between January 01, 2000 and May 31, 2016, published in English or French languages and without any geographical limitation. PubMed and EMBASE will be extensively screened to identify potentially eligible studies, completed by manual search. Two authors will independently screen, select studies, extract data, and assess the risk of bias; disagreements will be resolved by consensus. Clinical heterogeneity will be investigated by examining the design and setting (including geographic region), procedure used for genetic testing, calculation of incidence or prevalence, and outcomes in each study. Studies found to be clinically homogeneous will be pooled together through a random effects meta-analysis. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed using the chi-square test of homogeneity and quantified using the I DISCUSSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis is expected to draw a clear picture of phenotypic and genotypic presentations of NDM in order to better understand the condition and adequately address challenges in respect with its management. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016039765.
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.