ArticleJournal of diabetes and metabolic disorders2025
Grip strength, metabolic syndrome, and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a prospective study.
Article in Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Myoprotective Fat-Loss Phenotypes in Obesity-Associated Type 2 Diabetes: A 12-Month Real-World Cohort Study of Metformin-Based Treatment Regimens.Clinics and practice · 2026Article
- The High Prevalence of High Normal Blood Pressure and the Differential Association of Grip Strength Metrics with Hypertension in a National Sample of Chinese College Students.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study examines the impact of absolute grip strength (AGS) and relative grip strength (RGS) on the risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), especially in relation to metabolic syndrome (MetS). Methods: 1,935 participants were adults aged 51 to 81 years with an average observation period of 6.50 years. The diagnosis of DM was based on American Diabetes Association. The JAMA 5030J1 dynamometer was used to measure the grip strength. Multivariable extended Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for DM incidence. Results: The DM risk increased with the number of MetS risk factors. High AGS was associated with a reduced DM risk (HR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.44-0.99), but association disappeared when adjusted for MetS. High RGS was significantly associated with a reduced risk of DM incidence (HR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.33-0.72), even after adjusting for MetS (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.42-0.94). With the presence of MetS, higher AGS was associated with a greater increase in the DM risk compared to lower AGS, while higher RGS was associated with a less increase in the DM risk compared to lower RGS. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that RGS is a more reliable predictor of DM risks than AGS. Additionally, MetS significantly increases DM risk, particularly in individuals with obesity and hypertension. The study highlights the importance of assessing muscle quality in DM prevention and suggest that improving muscle quality may help mitigate DM risk.
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.