ArticleAnnals of epidemiology2019
Estimating prevalence of type I and type II diabetes using incidence rates: the SEARCH for diabetes in youth study.
Article in Annals of epidemiology, 2019. 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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diabetes Care Barriers, Use, and Health Outcomes in Younger Adults With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Oxidative stress and pediatric diabetic cardiovascular complications: emerging research and clinical applications.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2025Review
- Evaluation of administrative case definitions for hypertension in Canadian children.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Estimating incidence of type 1 and type 2 diabetes using prevalence data: the SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth study.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Projections of Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Burden in the U.S. Population Aged <20 Years Through 2060: The SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study.Diabetes care · 2023Article
- Missed meal boluses and poorer glycemic control impact on neurocognitive function may be associated with white matter integrity in adolescents with type 1 diabetes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Diabetes-Related Worries and Coping Among Youth and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMost surveillance efforts in childhood diabetes have focused on incidence, whereas prevalence is rarely reported. This study aimed to assess whether a mathematical illness-death model accurately estimated future prevalence from baseline prevalence and incidence rates in children.
methodsSEARCH for Diabetes in Youth is an ongoing population-based surveillance study of prevalence and incidence of diabetes and its complications among youth in the United States. We used age-, sex-, and race/ethnicity-specific SEARCH estimates of the prevalence of type I and type II diabetes in 2001 and incidence from 2002 to 2008. These data were used in a partial differential equation to estimate prevalence in 2009 with 95% bootstrap confidence intervals. Model-based prevalence was compared with the observed prevalence in 2009.
resultsMost confidence intervals for the difference between estimated and observed prevalence included zero, indicating no evidence for a difference between the two methods. The width of confidence intervals indicated high precision for the estimated prevalence when considering all races/ethnicities. In strata with few cases, precision was reduced.
conclusionsFuture prevalence of type I and type II diabetes in youth may be accurately estimated from baseline prevalence and incidence. Diabetes surveillance could benefit from potential cost savings of this method.
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.