Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35146248›Full record

ArticleJournal of health monitoring2019

An international comparison of noncommunicable disease reporting: the case of diabetes mellitus.

Lukas Reitzle, Christian Schmidt, Christa Scheidt-Nave, Thomas Ziese

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health monitoring, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Lukas ReitzleRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Christian SchmidtRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Christa Scheidt-NaveRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Thomas ZieseRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Against the background of the growing burden associated with diabetes mellitus, the German Federal Ministry of Health commissioned the Robert Koch Institute to develop a national diabetes surveillance. The periodic publication of up-to-date data needed by diverse target audiences (dissemination) to develop subsequent public health measures is a crucial aspect of disease surveillance. The study produced an overview of diabetes surveillance in various countries with the intention of developing a dissemination strategy. This involved a two-stage process beginning with an online survey of public health experts from 46 countries. Structured Internet research was then carried out for countries that did not provide a response (19 out of 46). The majority of countries (38 out of 46; 83%) include diabetes in their health reporting; three quarters (29 out of 38; 77%) of these countries rely on an indicator-based reporting system. The study found that the most common formats used to publish information about diabetes and other noncommunicable diseases were topic-specific reports (24 out of 36; 67%) and national health reports (23 out of 36; 64%), followed by online formats such as websites or databases (20 out of 36; 57%). Moreover, health reporting primarily targets politicians (19 out of 20; 95%) as well as the media and the press (16 out of 20; 80%). The study found that both printed and online publications form part of a comprehensive dissemination strategy, however address different audiences.

Indexed as

DIABETES MELLITUSDISSEMINATIONHEALTH REPORTINGNCD SURVEILLANCE

Identifiers

PMID35146248
PMCPMC8822247

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.