Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32746747›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2020

Early detection of type 2 diabetes in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas in Stockholm - comparing reach of community and facility-based screening.

Linda Timm, Katri Harcke, Ida Karlsson, Kristi Sidney Annerstedt, Helle Mölsted Alvesson, Nouha Saleh Stattin, Birger C Forsberg, Claes-Göran Östenson, Meena Daivadanam

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Global health action, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Linda TimmDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet , Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-5681-2644
Katri HarckeAcademic Primary Health Care Centre, Region Stockholm , Stockholm, Sweden.
Ida KarlssonDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet , Stockholm, Sweden.
Kristi Sidney AnnerstedtDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet , Stockholm, Sweden.
Helle Mölsted AlvessonDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet , Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-6109-7203
Nouha Saleh StattinAcademic Primary Health Care Centre, Region Stockholm , Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3211-1376
Birger C ForsbergDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet , Stockholm, Sweden.
Claes-Göran ÖstensonDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Endocrine and Diabetes Unit, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital , Solna, Sweden.
Meena DaivadanamDepartment of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet , Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-9532-6059
Karolinska Institutet · SEKarolinska University Hospital · SEStockholm Health Care Services · SEUppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundType 2 diabetes and its high-risk stage, prediabetes, are often undiagnosed. Early detection of these conditions is of importance to avoid organ complications due to the metabolic disturbances associated with diabetes. Diabetes screening can detect persons unaware of diabetes risk and the elevated glucose levels can potentially be reversed through lifestyle modification and medication. There are mainly two approaches to diabetes screening: opportunistic facility-based screening at health facilities and community screening.

objectiveTo determine the difference in population reach and participant characteristics between community- and facility-based screening for detection of type 2 diabetes and persons at high risk of developing diabetes.

methodsFinnish diabetes risk score (FINDRISC) is a risk assessment tool used by two diabetes projects to conduct community- and facility-based screenings in disadvantaged suburbs of Stockholm. In this study, descriptive and limited inferential statistics were carried out analyzing data from 2,564 FINDRISC forms from four study areas. Community- and facility-based screening was compared in terms of participant characteristics and with population data from the respective areas to determine their reach.

resultsOur study found that persons born in Africa and Asia were reached through community screening to a higher extent than with facility-based screening, while persons born in Sweden and other European countries were reached more often by facility-based screening. Also, younger persons were reached more frequently through community screening compared with facility-based screening. Both types of screening reached more women than men.

conclusionCommunity-based screening and facility-based screening were complementary methods in reaching different population groups at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Community screening in particular reached more hard-to-reach groups with unfavorable risk profiles, making it a critical strategy for T2D prevention. More men should be recruited to intervention studies and screening initiatives to achieve a gender balance.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCommunity Health ServicesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Early DiagnosisFemaleHealth FacilitiesHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPrediabetic StatePrimary Health CareRisk FactorsSocioeconomic FactorsCommunity screeningfacility-based screeningFINDRISChard-to-reachopportunistic screeningprediabetesT2D

Identifiers

PMID32746747
PMCPMC7480601
OpenAlexW3047024625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.