ArticleEndocrine2018
A randomized general population study of the effects of repeated health checks on incident diabetes.
Article in Endocrine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of general health checks in adults: A systematic review.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- Primary Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the European Union: A Systematic Review of Interventional Studies.Nutrients · 2025Pooled it
- Screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Randomised trials conducted using cohorts: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2024Article
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
backgroundIt is not clear whether offering health checks to the general population can be used to prevent diabetes. Few randomized studies have had a long-term follow-up. We used a randomly selected population cohort as a randomized trial to examine the effect of repeated health checks on the 30-year incidence of diabetes.
methodsThe study included all persons from 11 municipalities in Copenhagen aged 30, 40, 50, and 60 years (n = 17845). An age-stratified and gender-stratified random sample (N = 4789) was invited to participate in a maximum of three health checks between 1982 and 1994 ('intervention group'). The remaining 12994 persons were defined as the 'control group'. The health checks included a questionnaire, a physical examination including assessment of overweight and blood pressure, and blood sampling with determination of serum lipid levels. Based on the person's answers and test results, the participants were given individual information about the results, disease risk and lifestyle. Their general practitioner, too, was provided with written information on the test results. Both groups were followed in the Danish Civil Registration System, the Danish National Diabetes Register, the Cause of Death Registry, and the National Patient Registry until 31 December 2012.
findingsThere were 2636 incident cases of diabetes and a mean follow-up time of 24.1 years. The age-adjusted and gender-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval, CI) for the intervention group versus the control group was HR = 1.07 (95% CI: 0.98, 1.16, p = 0.153).
interpretationOffering repeated general health checks to the general population had no preventive effect on the development of diabetes during 30 years of follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29417371What 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.