ReviewActa neurologica Belgica2026
Type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Acta neurologica Belgica, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune disease that causes central nervous system (CNS) inflammation. Investigating comorbidities in people with MS (PwMS) is crucial, as coexisting conditions can negatively impact health outcomes and increase mortality rates. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is one of these comorbidities. Recent literature has not reached a consensus on the effect of MS on the risk of developing T2DM. Moreover, exploring the pooled prevalence of T2DM among PwMS is essential for a comprehensive understanding of this comorbidity burden. Therefore, this review aimed to determine the overall prevalence of T2DM among PwMS and explore any potential association between them.
methodsPubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched up to April 27th, 2024, to identify literature investigating the frequency of T2DM in PwMS and the association between T2DM and MS. The random-effects model was applied to estimate the pooled prevalence, odds ratio (OR), hazard ratio (HR), and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the presentation of outcomes.
resultsForty-five observational studies on 76,189 PwMS and 187,819 healthy controls (HCs) met the inclusion criteria. The analysis revealed the pooled prevalence of T2DM among PwMS was 5% (95% CI: 3.9% to 6.1%, I2 = 97%, p-heterogeneity < 0.01). Furthermore, there was no significant association between MS and the odds of developing T2DM (OR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.26, p-value = 0.61, I2 = 92%). Additionally, MS did not significantly change the risk of developing T2DM (HR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.91 to 1.18, p-value = 0.58, I2 = 9%).
conclusionThe current review indicates a low prevalence of T2DM among PwMS. Additionally, MS does not alter the risk of developing T2DM. The lack of association between MS and T2DM may reduce concerns about the impact of MS treatment on T2DM onset. Furthermore, given the high prevalence of MS, even a low prevalence of T2DM among PwMS could represent a substantial number of affected individuals, highlighting the need for early diagnosis and effective management of T2DM in this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41975171What 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.