ArticleHormone research in paediatrics2026
Autoantibody-Positive versus Autoantibody-Negative Type 1 Diabetes in Children: Clinical and Biochemical Characteristics.
Article in Hormone research in paediatrics, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to investigate differences in clinical and biochemical characteristics between autoantibody-positive and autoantibody-negative type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in children, to get a better understanding of autoantibody-negative T1DM.
methodsThis study is a monocenter retrospective cross-sectional cohort study conducted at Diaboss, a Dutch pediatric diabetes clinic at OLVG hospital. Patients diagnosed with T1DM before the age of 18 years were included. Patients tested positive for one or more diabetes-associated autoantibodies (GADA, IA2A, ZnT8, IAA, and/or ICA) were considered autoantibody positive. Patients solely positive for anti-ICA were excluded.
resultsA total of 562 patients were recruited. Eight of 562 (1.4%) patients tested positive for a monogenic cause of diabetes at a later stage and were excluded. A total of 11 of 488 (2.2%) autoantibody-positive patients tested solely positive for anti-ICA and were excluded. In 15 of 66 patients (23%) with autoantibody-negative T1DM, monogenic causes were ruled out by genetic testing. The other 51 patients (77%) were not tested. Autoantibody-negative patients with a positive family history for diabetes were more likely to be tested for monogenic causes (p = 0.002). No significant differences in demographic and clinical characteristics, diabetes presentation, and long-term diabetes regulation were found between autoantibody-positive and autoantibody-negative patients.
conclusionIn our study, autoantibody-positive and -negative T1DM patients were similar. This implies that both patient groups can be approached in the same way regarding treatment, education, and prognosis. Misdiagnosis of monogenic causes within T1DM could occur; therefore, clinicians should be aware of and perform genetic tests according to international guidelines.
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.