ArticleJournal of diabetes and metabolic disorders2026
Capillary sampling during oral glucose testing as a screening test for detecting prediabetes and diabetes in high-risk individuals.
Article in Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Early identification of diabetes and prediabetes is critical to mitigating disease progression and complications. While capillary blood glucose (CBG) measurement has been suggested as a practical alternative to venous plasma glucose (VPG), discrepancies between these assays may affect diagnostic accuracy. This study aimed to assess the validity and optimal thresholds of CBG determined by two commonly used glucometers compared with the standard diagnostic criteria among a high-risk cohort. Methods: In this cross-sectional study ( Results: CBG measurements showed strong concordance with VPG, yielding an optimal FCBG threshold of 112.5 mg/dl for diabetes detection, with sensitivities and specificities exceeding 93%, and NPV above 99%, compared with the FPG as the reference criterion. Also, the FCBG value of 98.5 mg/dl exhibited the highest AUCs in ROC analysis for detecting hyperglycemia in the fasting state (IFG or diabetes), with sensitivities ranging from 75.7% to 79.2%.Furthermore, 2-h CBG cut-point value of 195.5 mg/dl demonstrated good performance in detecting diabetes (specificities and sensitivities: 93.1-100%), considering OGTT as the reference criterion; although there were discrepancies in the test readings, particularly at higher glucose concentrations. Conclusion: Both fasting and 2-h CBG showed good diagnostic performance for detecting diabetes and prediabetes among high-risk populations. These findings advocate for their incorporation into community-based screening frameworks to optimize early disease detection.
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.