ArticlePloS one2022
Relationship between HbA1c, fructosamine and clinical assessment of glycemic control in dogs.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of inflammation with glycemic control, insulin sensitivity, and beta-cell function in diabetic cats.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2026Article
- The role of HbA1c in identifying dogs at high risk for diabetes despite normal blood glucose levels.Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire · 2025Article
- Glycated Albumin and Continuous Glucose Monitoring Metrics in Dogs with Diabetes Mellitus: A Pilot Study.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Ex Vivo Immune Function and Modulatory Effects of Calcitriol in Dogs with Naturally Occurring Diabetes Mellitus.Veterinary sciences · 2024Article
- Complications associated with a flash glucose monitoring system in diabetic dogs.Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSerum fructosamine is a routine test used for clinical monitoring of diabetes mellitus (DM) but the usefulness of HbA1c for this purpose has not been extensively studied. HYPOTHESIS: The study aimed to compare the ability of blood HbA1c and serum fructosamine tests to correctly classify DM control determined using a clinically-based assessment. ANIMALS: 28 client-owned dogs with naturally-occurring diabetes mellitus.
methodsCross-sectional observational study. Ability of fructosamine and HbA1c tests to classify diabetes control in dogs was determined.
resultsClinical assessment classified 50% of dogs as having good diabetic control and 82% as having acceptable diabetic control. Analysis using Cohen's kappa test showed that agreements between fructosamine and HbA1c results and the clinical assessment ranged from poor to fair. Fructosamine and HbA1c results from each dog showed a moderate correlation. Overall, the HbA1c test showed the best agreement with the clinical assessment when diabetes control was considered either acceptable or unacceptable, although the strength of agreement was considered fair (kappa = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The HbA1c concentration was found to be more consistent with clinical evaluation of diabetes control than was the serum fructosamine concentration. The HbA1c level is a useful tool for assessment of glycemic status in diabetic dogs but should be used alongside other tests for outpatient monitoring of clinically stable diabetic dogs.
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.