ArticlePRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)2025
Starting the Conversation: Patient Perceptions of Self-Assessed Type-2 Diabetes Risk.
Article in PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.), 2025. 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.
- Knowledge level on prediabetes of family physicians and family medicine resident physicians.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Little is known about patients' perceptions of their risk for type-2 diabetes (T2D), or if knowledge of risk could facilitate weight and diabetes prevention discussions with health care professionals. Methods: In our academic family medicine practice, 25 patients completed a previsit T2D risk assessment on their phone and answered interview and survey questions to assess their understanding of their risk for developing T2D. Results: Interest in their T2D risk was high, but self-estimation of risk before obtaining their score was low (21/25 reported ≤30% chance of developing diabetes). All patients perceived T2D to be very serious, most remembered their risk score (18/23 correct) when interviewed 3-5 days later, and many reported that the score increased their motivation to prevent T2D development. Despite this, the calculated risk result was not considered accurate by 8/23 patients and only 4/23 patients shared their score during their appointment visit. Conclusion: T2D risk evaluation can facilitate patient awareness of their risk and lifestyle improvement, but clinician engagement and communication are needed for interpretation, treatment, and linkage to prediabetes care.
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.