ArticleLancet regional health. Americas2022
Disparities in adherence to diabetes screening guidelines among males and females in a universal care setting: A population-based study of 1,380,697 adults.
Article in Lancet regional health. Americas, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness of implementing the National Health Service England Diabetes Prevention Programme in Canada: a modelling study.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2026Article
- Differences in screen-detected type 2 diabetes in two targeted community-based screening campaigns in Denmark.BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2026Article
- Trends in type 2 diabetes incidence and BMI at diagnosis by age, sex, and ethnicity, 2011-2024: a population-based analysis of the English National Diabetes Audit.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Sociodemographic and disease-related factors associated with treatment adherence among patients with type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study in southern Iran.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Hepatic and abdominal adiposity in type 2 diabetes as assessed with machine learning on computed tomography scans.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
- Article
- 2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2026.Diabetes care · 2026Review
- Workplace-Based Glucose Screening for Type 2 Diabetes in French Civil Servants: Prospective Observational Cohort Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Observational
- Patient experiences and perspectives of DMARD monitoring in Australians with long-disease-duration rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis.BMC rheumatology · 2025Article
- Access to Blood Glucose Testing in Peru: Who Is Getting Tested?Epidemiologia (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Control Measures on Screening and Diagnoses of Type 2 Diabetes in British Columbia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Diabetes Mellitus screening and associated factors in Peru: A cross-sectional analysis of a national health survey.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Association Between Hemoglobin A1c and Development of Cardiovascular Disease in Canadian Men and Women Without Diabetes at Baseline: A Population-Based Study of 608 474 Adults.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- Article
- SynthA1c: Towards Clinically Interpretable Patient Representations for Diabetes Risk Stratification.Predictive Intelligence in Medicine. PRIME (Workshop) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: National guidelines recommend that all adults over the age of 40 years undergo screening for diabetes at least once every 3-years. We examined the adherence to these guidelines among males and females after accounting for age, urban/rural residence, and material deprivation. We also examined the incidence of prediabetes and diabetes in adherent and non-adherent individuals. Methods: Our study is based on a retrospective population-level inception cohort of adults aged 40-79 years without pre-existing diabetes or cardiovascular disease on April 1, 2013. Adherence during a 3-year screening period (2013-2016) and prediabetes and diabetes during a 4-year follow-up period were examined. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine the adjusted association between sex and adherence. Findings: Among 1,380,697 individuals (49·2% male, 50·8% female) adherence rates were 69·9% in males and 79·8% in females. Sex-differences in adherence were largest in younger individuals (58·0% and 72·6% and in males and females aged 40-44 years, respectively) and consistent across rural/urban residence and material deprivation. Females were more adherent (adjusted odds ratio 1·92; 95% confidence interval 1·89 to 1·95) than males. Prediabetes and diabetes rates among individuals who adhered to screening guidelines were 15·7% and 2·6% among males and 13·4% and 1·5% among females. During the follow-up period, an additional 3·2% and 1·9% of adherent males and females had diabetes. Incidence rates of prediabetes and diabetes during the follow-up period among individuals who did not adhere to screening guidelines were 8·8% and 2·1% among males and 7·3% and 1·3% among females. Interpretation: Adherence to diabetes screening guidelines is sub-optimal, especially among young males. Despite lower rates of adherence to screening, males have higher rates of prediabetes and diabetes compared to females. There is a need for education campaigns to improve diabetes screening rates in young adults, especially males. Funding: This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Sex and Gender Science Chair (Recipient: Kaul).
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.