ArticleRevista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health2019
Validation of a non-laboratorial questionnaire to identify Metabolic Syndrome among a population in central Mexico.
Article in Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A non-invasive tool for the early identification of children at risk of cardiometabolic dysfunction: data from the PODiaCar project.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Metabolic Age, an Index Based on Basal Metabolic Rate, Can Predict Individuals That are High Risk of Developing Metabolic Syndrome.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the reliability of a non-laboratorial questionnaire, the
methodsClinical and biochemical parameters were collected for 232 participants from 1 June 2012 - 31 August 2013. Three definitions of Metabolic Syndrome (Harmonizing, National Cholesterol Education Program Expert Panel and Adult Treatment Panel III [ATPIII], and International Diabetes Federation [IDF]) were used to allocate subjects to either the normal or Metabolic Syndrome positive (MetS+) group. The predictability of the questionnaire was determined by the Area-Under-the-Receiver-Operating Characteristic curve (AUC). Youden's index was calculated and the highest score was considered the optimal cutoff value. Cohen´s kappa (κ) was calculated to determine the level of agreement between the ESF-I questionnaire (max score: 15 based on 15 items) and Metabolic Syndrome.
resultsFrom 53.8% - 60.7% of the participants were determined to be MetS+. The average questionnaire score was significantly higher in the MetS+ group for each definition (4.0 vs. 8.0, P < 0.05). The ESF-I questionnaire was predictive for the Harmonizing definition (AUC = 0.841, 95%CI: 0.790 - 0.892), the ATPIII definition (AUC = 0.827, 95%CI: 0.774 - 0.880), and the IDF definition (AUC = 0.836, 95%CI: 0.785 - 0.887). A cutoff value of 7 was determined for each definition; therefore, the cohort was re-categorized based on questionnaire results. There was a strong agreement between the ESF-I questionnaire and MetS (Harmonizing: accuracy = 77.6%, κ = 0.554; ATPIII: accuracy = 74.1%, κ = 0.489; IDF: accuracy = 74.6%, κ = 0.495,
conclusionThe ESF-I questionnaire can identify MetS+ patients, and therefore, lead to earlier diagnoses, reduced number of consultations, and lower costs with easier application.
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.