ArticleCureus2024
A Determination of Salivary and Serum Glucose Levels in Patients With Type II Diabetes Mellitus.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical Implications and Research Progress of Salivary Biomarkers for Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Review
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
aimThe aim of this work was to determine and compare serum and salivary glucose levels in patients with type II diabetes mellitus (DM). MATERIAL AND
methodsThis study had an overall sample size of 100, which consisted of male and female volunteers aged 30-67 years. Both in-depth interviews and physical tests were conducted. Blood and saliva were collected from the participants while fasting, which were analyzed to determine the levels of salivary alpha-amylase (α-amylase). Both the subjects and the controls were instructed to test their blood glucose levels while fasting and it was suggested that HbA1c values will be used for diagnosing diabetes following the guidelines of the American Diabetes Association, Centers for Disease Control, and World Health Organization.
resultsThe average age of the control group (Category A) was noted as 47.52±6.28 years, and that of the study group (Category B) was 49.17±7.25 years. In Category A, female (n=23) were 46%, and 54% were male (n=27); and 40% of the people in Category B were female (n=20), and 60% were male (n=30). The majority of patients (54%) in Category B displayed an average level of DM control (n=27), followed by poor control (24%. n=12), well-controlled (20%, n=10), and uncontrolled DM (2%, n=1). Category A had an average salivary α-amylase concentration of 3.1±0.88 U/L, whereas that of Category B was 12.06±2.36 U/L. Thus, the mean salivary α-amylase level of Category B was found to be much higher than that of Category A, and this difference was statistically significant (p<0.001).
conclusionThe determination of α-amylase levels in the saliva of individuals suspected of having type II DM has been suggested as a potential diagnostic method. Screenings conducted at healthcare institutions and community health fairs, as well as epidemiological studies, might benefit from this method. We believe that normal clinical practice should include the use of saliva in a broad variety of diagnostic tests.
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.