ArticleArchives of endocrinology and metabolism2023
Prevalence of metabolic syndrome in adolescents based on three diagnostic definitions: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Archives of endocrinology and metabolism, 2023. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unraveling Metabolic Syndrome in Youth: The Obesity Epidemic's Hidden Complication.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Artificial Neural Networks to Predict Metabolic Syndrome without Invasive Methods in Adolescents.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Prevalence and correlates of metabolic syndrome among adults in freetown, Sierra Leone: A comparative analysis of NCEP ATP III, IDF and harmonized ATP III criteria.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2024Article
- Metabolic syndrome: a population-based study of prevalence and risk factors.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Double diabetes-when type 1 diabetes meets type 2 diabetes: definition, pathogenesis and recognition.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2024Review
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
Objective: There is no consensus as to the best criterion for the evaluation of metabolic syndrome (MS), impairing the estimation of its prevalence. This study aims to compare MS estimates using three recommended definitions for adolescents based on a cross-sectional study nested in the Consortium of Brazilian Birth Cohorts in São Luís, Maranhão. Subjects and methods: A total of 2,515 adolescents aged between 18 and 19 years were evaluated. The criteria of International Diabetes Federation (IDF) and National Cholesterol Education Program Panel III (NCEP-ATP) modified by Cook and cols. (2003) and De Ferranti and cols. (2004) defined SM. To compare the estimates of MS prevalence, the chi-square, Fisher´s exact and Cohen´s Kappa index tests were used. Results: Among the 2,064 participants evaluated in the final sample. The prevalence of MS ranged from 4.2% (95% CI: 3.3-5.1) to 10.2% (95% CI: 8.8-11.4). When comparing the estimates of MS prevalence in the total sample and by sex, a statistically significant difference was observed. The agreement between the criteria ranged from 0.42 (CI 95%: 0.35-0.49) to 0.55 (CI 95%: 0.48-0.62) in the total sample, 0.33 (CI 95%: 0.24-0.42) to 0.59 (95%CI: 0.47-0.71) among boys and 0.39 (95% CI: 0.26-0.52) to 0.54 (95% CI: 0.44-0.64) among girls. Conclusion: Different criteria provide different estimates for the prevalence of MS in adolescents, reflecting the importance of establishing a consensus.
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.