ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2018
Effect of the Standardization of Diagnostic Tests on the Prevalence of Diabetes Mellitus and Impaired Fasting Glucose.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Importance of Standardizing Laboratory Medicine in a Super-aging Society.Public health weekly report · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWithout standardization of medical laboratory's testing practices, there is an increase in false diagnoses when relying on test results. However, the effect of test standardization is difficult to assess numerically. This study's purpose is to quantify the effect of the standardization level of a laboratory on the prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) and impaired fasting glucose (IFG).
methodsLaboratories were classified into three levels: 'highly-standardized laboratory,' 'basically-standardized laboratory,' and 'non-standardized laboratory.' Based on the results of Korean External Quality Assessment Scheme (KEQAS), the cutoff values for diagnosis of DM and IFG were recalculated, given false positive and false negative rates.
resultsThe prevalence of DM and IFG in the population as a whole was estimated using the 2013 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) database. When the prevalence of DM from KNHANES was 11.88% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.59%-13.17%), the proportion with a systematic false error ranged from 10.91% (95% CI, 9.65%-12.17%) to 13.09% (95% CI, 11.74%-14.45%). The prevalence of IFG varied from 13.59% (95% CI, 12.25%-14.91%) to 40.49% (95% CI, 38.54%-42.43%), in contrast to 24.58% (95% CI, 22.85%-26.31%) of the reference value. The prevalence of DM and IFG tended to be over- and under-estimated more as the laboratory standardization level became lower, respectively.
conclusionOur study proved that standardization of clinical laboratory tests is an important factor affecting the prevalence estimation of national disease statistics based on the simulation using KNHANES data.
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.