ArticleDiabetes care2022
Model for Integration of Monogenic Diabetes Diagnosis Into Routine Care: The Personalized Diabetes Medicine Program.
Article in Diabetes care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetics Evaluation Outcomes From an Academic Multidisciplinary Atypical Diabetes Program.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2025Article
- Partial GCK gene deletion mutations causing maturity-onset diabetes of the young.Acta diabetologica · 2024Review
- Proof-of-concept Application of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data Analytics to Identify Diabetes Glucotypes.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2023Article
- Enrollment of underrepresented racial and ethnic groups in the Rare and Atypical Diabetes Network (RADIANT).Journal of clinical and translational science · 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
24 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo implement, disseminate, and evaluate a sustainable method for identifying, diagnosing, and promoting individualized therapy for monogenic diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsPatients were recruited into the implementation study through a screening questionnaire completed in the waiting room or through the patient portal, physician recognition, or self-referral. Patients suspected of having monogenic diabetes based on the processing of their questionnaire and other data through an algorithm underwent next-generation sequencing for 40 genes implicated in monogenic diabetes and related conditions.
resultsThree hundred thirteen probands with suspected monogenic diabetes (but most diagnosed with type 2 diabetes) were enrolled from October 2014 to January 2019. Sequencing identified 38 individuals with monogenic diabetes, with most variants found in GCK or HNF1A. Positivity rates for ascertainment methods were 3.1% for clinic screening, 5.3% for electronic health record portal screening, 16.5% for physician recognition, and 32.4% for self-referral. The algorithmic criterion of non-type 1 diabetes before age 30 years had an overall positivity rate of 15.0%.
conclusionsWe successfully modeled the efficient incorporation of monogenic diabetes diagnosis into the diabetes care setting, using multiple strategies to screen and identify a subpopulation with a 12.1% prevalence of monogenic diabetes by molecular testing. Self-referral was particularly efficient (32% prevalence), suggesting that educating the lay public in addition to clinicians may be the most effective way to increase the diagnosis rate in monogenic diabetes. Scaling up this model will assure access to diagnosis and customized treatment among those with monogenic diabetes and, more broadly, access to personalized medicine across disease areas.
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.