Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37037984›Full record

SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2023

Measurement of Perceived Risk of Developing Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Literature Review.

Serena A Rodriguez, Jasmin A Tiro, Austin S Baldwin, Hayley Hamilton-Bevil, Michael Bowen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
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

5 authors.

Serena A RodriguezDepartment of Health Promotion & Behavioral Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center Houston (UTHealth Houston) School of Public Health, Trinity Towers, 2777 N Stemmons Fwy, Ste 8400, TX, 75207, Dallas, USA.
Jasmin A TiroDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, 5841 S. Maryland Ave., Chicago, IL, 60637, USA.
Austin S BaldwinDepartment of Psychology, Southern Methodist University, Expressway Tower, PO Box 750442, Dallas, TX, 75275, USA.
Hayley Hamilton-BevilUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Dr., San Antonio, TX, 75229, USA.
Michael BowenDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX, 75390, USA. Michael.Bowen@utsouthwestern.edu.

Funding

UT Southwestern Center for Translational Medicine (UL1/KL2/TL1)UL1TR001105 · NCATS · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI TOTO, ROBERT DANIEL · 2013 to 2017
$24.5M
Predicting Diabetes Risk Using Glucose DataK23DK104065 · NIDDK · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI BOWEN, MICHAEL EDWARD · 2014 to 2018
$862k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001105NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK104065NIDDK NIH HHS K23DK104065
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis systematic review describes approaches to measuring perceived risk of developing type 2 diabetes among individuals without diagnoses and describes the use of theories, models, and frameworks in studies assessing perceived risk. While a systematic review has synthesized perceived risk of complications among individuals with diabetes, no reviews have systematically assessed how perceived risk is measured among those without a diagnosis.

methodsMedline, PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHAL databases were searched for studies conducted through October 2022 with measures of perceived risk among adults ≥ 18 years without a diabetes diagnosis. Extracted data included study characteristics, measures, and health behavior theories, models, or frameworks used.

resultsEighty-six studies met inclusion criteria. Six examined perceived risk scales' psychometric properties. Eighty measured perceived risk using (1) a single item; (2) a composite score from multiple items or subconstructs; and (3) multiple subconstructs but no composite score. Studies used items measuring "comparative risk," "absolute or lifetime risk," and "perceived risk" without defining how each differed. Sixty-four studies used cross-sectional designs. Twenty-eight studies mentioned use of health behavior theories in study design or selection of measures. DISCUSSION: There was heterogeneity in how studies operationalized perceived risk; only one third of studies referenced a theory, model, or framework as guiding design or scale and item selection. Use of perceived lifetime risk, absolute risk, or comparative risk limits comparisons across studies. Consideration of context, target population, and how data are utilized is important when selecting measures; we present a series of questions to ask when selecting measures for use in research and clinical settings. This review is the first to categorize how perceived risk is measured in the diabetes prevention domain; most literature focuses on perceived risk among those with diabetes diagnoses. Limitations include exclusion of non-English and gray literature and single reviewer screening and data extraction.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2AdultCross-Sectional StudiesHealth BehaviorHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansDiabetesHealth behavior theoryPerceived riskPerceived susceptibility

Identifiers

PMID37037984
PMCPMC10272015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.