ArticlePloS one2024
External validation of Finnish diabetes risk score (FINDRISC) and Latin American FINDRISC for screening of undiagnosed dysglycemia: Analysis in a Peruvian hospital health care workers sample.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lifestyle and Psychosocial Determinants of Type 2 Diabetes Risk Across Adulthood: The Role of Burnout in a Large Occupational Cohort.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Risk of Diabetes Mellitus and Its Association with Cardiorespiratory Endurance in Zenú Indigenous People in Momil, Córdoba, Colombia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Taking diabetes risk screening to the community: Feasibility and acceptability of the FINDRISC tool in vulnerable populations in Argentina.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate the external validity of Finnish diabetes risk score (FINDRISC) and Latin American FINDRISC (LAFINDRISC) for undiagnosed dysglycemia in hospital health care workers.
methodsWe carried out a cross-sectional study on health workers without a prior history of diabetes mellitus (DM). Undiagnosed dysglycemia (prediabetes or diabetes mellitus) was defined using fasting glucose and two-hour oral glucose tolerance test. LAFINDRISC is an adapted version of FINDRISC with different waist circumference cut-off points. We calculated the area under the receptor operational characteristic curve (AUROC) and explored the best cut-off point.
resultsWe included 549 participants in the analysis. The frequency of undiagnosed dysglycemia was 17.8%. The AUROC of LAFINDRISC and FINDRISC were 71.5% and 69.2%; p = 0.007, respectively. The optimal cut-off for undiagnosed dysglycemiaaccording to Index Youden was ≥ 11 in LAFINDRISC (Sensitivity: 78.6%; Specificity: 51.7%) and ≥12 in FINDRISC (Sensitivity: 70.4%; Specificity: 53.9%).
conclusionThe discriminative capacity of both questionnaires is good for the diagnosis of dysglycemia in the healthcare personnel of the María Auxiliadora hospital. The LAFINDRISC presented a small statistical difference, nontheless clinically similar, since there was no difference by age or sex. Further studies in the general population are required to validate these results.
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.