Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39318734›Full record

ArticleJournal of caring sciences2024

An Examination of the Agreement between Self-reported Diabetes and Paraclinical Tests, Medical Records, and Clinical Examinations: Insights from the Shahedieh Cohort Study, Yazd, Iran.

Farzan Madadizadeh, Mahdieh Momayyezi, Hossein Fallahzadeh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of caring sciences, 2024. 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

3 authors.

Farzan MadadizadehDepartments of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Center for Healthcare Data Modeling, School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5757-182X
Mahdieh MomayyeziDepartments of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Center for Healthcare Data Modeling, School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8205-3231
Hossein FallahzadehDepartments of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Center for Healthcare Data Modeling, School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6518-366X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Many researchers utilize self-reports to evaluate the prevalence of diseases. However, the accuracy of these self-reports remains uncertain in various studies. The objective of this particular study was to validate self-reported cases of diabetes among adults aged 35-70 years participating in the Shahedieh Cohort Study (SHCS). Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted using data from the first phase of SHCS during 2015-2017. The study included 1000 Iranian adults aged 35-70 years. The Gold standard for diabetes was determined by measuring fasting blood sugar (FBS) and evaluating the history of treatment and use of diabetes medications. To assess self-report validity, various statistical indices such as sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (NPVs), accuracy, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR-) and AUC were used. The agreement between self-reported diabetes and the gold standard was assessed using kappa statistics. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 13 and R 4.3.1 software. Results: The study findings indicated that the prevalence of diabetes was 18% according to self-report and 19.9% according to the gold standard measurement. The self-report accuracy was 95.67%. There was perfect agreement (kappa=0.86) between the self-report and gold standard criteria. The AUC, sensitivity and specificity of self-reported diabetes were 0.937, 93.82% and 96.08%, respectively. Additionally, the results suggested that the self-report of diabetes was more valid in individuals with a normal body mass index (BMI) and without a family history of diabetes in first-degree relatives. Conclusion: The results showed that in the absence of diabetes control programs, self-report of diabetes is reliable and recommended.

Indexed as

AgreementClinical examinationDiabetesSelf-report

Identifiers

PMID39318734
PMCPMC11417301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.