ArticlePloS one2022
Inequalities in care for the people with diabetes in Brazil: A nationwide study, 2019.
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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Type 2 diabetes morbidity, mortality and its associated risk factors across Brazilian regions: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.Archives of endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Article
- Effect of COVID-19 on mortality due to diabetes mellitus in Brazil: A time series analysis from 2010 to 2023.PloS one · 2026Article
- Care and primary health care access indicators among Brazilian adults with diabetes mellitus, National Health Survey 2019.Revista brasileira de epidemiologia = Brazilian journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- [Diabetes mellitus: complications associated with time since diagnosis, health insurance, use of health services, and medication use, Brazilian National Health Survey 2019].Cadernos de saude publica · 2025Article
- Socioeconomic inequalities in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a study based on a population-based survey in Iran.BMC public health · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to evaluate inequalities in care for people with diabetes in Brazil. This cross-sectional population-based study was carried out in 2019 and evaluated care provided by receiving advice, requesting laboratory tests, and performing examinations. We used the slope index of inequality and concentration index to assess inequalities according to educational level and Poisson regression to estimate prevalence ratios for each outcome in the education category. We assessed a total of 6317 people with diabetes, 41.8% had their eyes checked, and 36.1% had their feet examined in the previous year. Prevalence for both examinations was 2.45 times higher in those from the highest level of education compared to those from the lowest level. The largest absolute differences (in percentage points) between the lowest and highest education levels in care indicators were the following: request for glycated hemoglobin test (39.0), glucose curve test (31.4), and eyes checked in the previous year (29.7). There were notable inequalities in the prevalence ratios of care provided to people with diabetes in Brazil. Requests for glycated hemoglobin tests, glucose curve tests, eye and feet examinations should be emphasized, especially for people from lower educational levels.
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.