Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36721598›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

Assessment of Glycemic Control in Patients With Diabetes in Northern Sudan Using Calculated HbA1c.

Omer Abdel Bagi, Ashraf Ewis

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Omer Abdel BagiDepartment of Pathology, Umm Al-Qura University, Al-Qunfudhah, SAU.
Ashraf EwisDepartment Public Health, Umm Al-Qura University, Al-Qunfudhah, SAU.
Umm al-Qura University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiabetes mellitus (DM) significantly burdens health services worldwide. As a simple and cost-effective method, the mathematical calculation of HbA1c is coming to be of value in areas with scarce resources. This study aimed to use calculated HbA1c to ascertain the prevalence of uncontrolled DM and correlate it with the risk factors for DM.

methodsIn the River Nile State of northern Sudan, a cross-sectional study was conducted in five leading cities from May to August 2021. Patients diagnosed and recorded as having type 2 or type 1 DM were included in this study. Enzymatic methods were used to assess fasting blood glucose (FBG). We used the mean of three FBG readings for three months to calculate HbA1c using the equation {HbA1c = (FBG mg/dl) x 0.03+2.6}, which was used to compute the estimated mediocre blood sugar over the course of three months.

resultsA total of 2047 diabetic patients from northern Sudan were studied for their DM control. Nearly two-thirds (65.2%) had uncontrolled DM. Of the patients studied, uncontrolled DM was significantly positively associated with older age, history of ischemic heart disease, and being a housewife. Multivariate regression analysis showed significant correlations between uncontrolled DM, an inactive lifestyle, and obesity.

conclusionThe prevalence of uncontrolled DM among known patients with diabetic in northern Sudan is high (65.2%). The inactive lifestyles of housewives and freelance workers, having type 1 DM, and being hypertensive and obese are risk factors significantly associated with uncontrolled DM and its related complications.

Indexed as

calculated hba1cdiabetes mellitusfasting blood glucose (fbg)glycemic controlsudan

Identifiers

PMID36721598
PMCPMC9883808
OpenAlexW4313240505

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.