Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37448463›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2023

Optimizing strategies to identify high risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

Paula Andreghetto Bracco, Maria Inês Schmidt, Alvaro Vigo, José Geraldo Mill, Pedro Guatimosim Vidigal, Sandhi Maria Barreto, Mária de Fátima Sander, Maria de Jesus Mendes da Fonseca, Bruce Bartholow Duncan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Paula Andreghetto BraccoPostgraduate Program in Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Maria Inês SchmidtPostgraduate Program in Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Alvaro VigoPostgraduate Program in Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
José Geraldo MillHealth Science Center, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Vitória, Brazil.
Pedro Guatimosim VidigalSchool of Medicine, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Sandhi Maria BarretoSchool of Medicine, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Mária de Fátima SanderSchool of Medicine, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Maria de Jesus Mendes da FonsecaNational School of Public Health, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Bruce Bartholow DuncanPostgraduate Program in Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BRUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul · BRFundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRHospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre · BRUniversidade Federal do Espírito Santo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The success of diabetes prevention based on early treatment depends on high-quality screening. This study compared the diagnostic properties of currently recommended screening strategies against alternative score-based rules to identify those at high risk of developing diabetes. Methods: The study used data from ELSA-Brasil, a contemporary cohort followed up for a mean (standard deviation) of 7.4 (0.54) years, to develop risk functions with logistic regression to predict incident diabetes based on socioeconomic, lifestyle, clinical, and laboratory variables. We compared the predictive capacity of these functions against traditional pre-diabetes cutoffs of fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2-h plasma glucose (2hPG), and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) alone or combined with recommended screening questionnaires. Results: Presenting FPG > 100 mg/dl predicted 76.6% of future cases of diabetes in the cohort at the cost of labeling 40.6% of the sample as high risk. If FPG testing was performed only in those with a positive American Diabetes Association (ADA) questionnaire, labeling was reduced to 12.2%, but only 33% of future cases were identified. Scores using continuously expressed clinical and laboratory variables produced a better balance between detecting more cases and labeling fewer false positives. They consistently outperformed strategies based on categorical cutoffs. For example, a score composed of both clinical and laboratory data, calibrated to detect a risk of future diabetes ≥20%, predicted 54% of future diabetes cases, labeled only 15.3% as high risk, and, compared to the FPG ≥ 100 mg/dl strategy, nearly doubled the probability of future diabetes among screen positives. Discussion: Currently recommended screening strategies are inferior to alternatives based on continuous clinical and laboratory variables.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Prediabetic StateBlood GlucoseGlucose Tolerance TestGlycated HemoglobinHumansBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinmass screeningpositive predictive valueprediction scorescreening strategiesscreening toolsensitivitytype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID37448463
PMCPMC10338007
OpenAlexW4382397455

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.