Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39155963›Full record

ArticleFarmaceuticos comunitarios2023

[Pilot trial on the detection of patients with undiagnosed diabetes mellitus type 2 performed in community pharmacies in Valladolid. Environmental impact evaluation].

Marina González Villoria, Maria Jesús Jarque Fuertes

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Farmaceuticos comunitarios, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Marina González VilloriaGraduada en Farmacia. Máster en Evaluación y Diseño de Medicamentos. Universidad de Salamanca Universidad de Salamanca España.
Maria Jesús Jarque FuertesDoctora en Farmacia. Universidad de Salamanca. Universidad de Salamanca España.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The complications that DM2 can develop, and the undiagnosed population (6%) highlight the importance of screening at the population level. The aim of this work is to evaluate and verify whether the professional activity performed in pharmacies is a good point to detect patients with undiagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus and to refer them for a possible diagnosis. Moreover, to evaluate the environmental impact of the actions. Methodology: Findrisc questionnaire for patients who met the inclusion criteria and agreed to participate in the study. Basal capillary blood glucose measurement if the result was ≥15 points and referral to a physician if blood glucose was ≥110mg/dL. Results: 44 pharmacies participated. The sample included 434 users; those with high or very high risk (Findrisc ≥15) underwent capillary basal glycemia, with a mean result of 124.51 mg/dL (SD=33.6). Out of the 89 patients referred to the physician (20.5%), the patients diagnosed with diabetes type 2 accounted for 3% of the analyzed sample. Conclusions: The number of newly diagnosed patients (3%) reflects that the community pharmacy is a good place for diabetes detection. In addition, the study reveals pharmacists' usefulness in their role as a health educator, since they provide guidance on healthy lifestyle habits to those patients not subject to physician referral. Furthermore, closer collaborations between physicians and pharmacists would be necessary in diabetes screening, since the return of information was low; although we can observe that in rural areas, where the relationship is close, the return rate was 85.2%.

Indexed as

Capillary blood sugarcarbon footprintCommunity PharmacyFindrisc testscreeningtype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID39155963
PMCPMC11326678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.