ArticleBMJ open diabetes research & care2026
Differences in screen-detected type 2 diabetes in two targeted community-based screening campaigns in Denmark.
Article in BMJ open diabetes research & care, 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
objectiveTargeted type 2 diabetes screening campaigns aim to improve patients' quality of life and life expectancy and reduce healthcare costs, although different setups may yield varying detection outcomes. The aim of this study is to assess whether at-home self-sampling improves the detection rates of prediabetes and diabetes compared with standard mobile unit screening. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsBetween June 2022 and November 2024, the Danish Diabetes Association offered free capillary HbA1c tests to individuals at high risk of diabetes based on the Leicester's Risk Assessment score. Two community-based screening setups were applied: (a) a mobile unit using a point-of-care device and (b) at-home self-sampling screening tests using mailed Hemoglobin Capillary Collection System analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography.
resultsIn total, 4051 individuals were tested via the mobile unit and 5609 via the at-home setup. In the mobile unit setup, the proportion of individuals aged ≥65 years was 54.3%, whereas in the at-home setup, they constituted 38.1%. HbA1c ≥48 mmol/mol (≥6.5%) was found in 3.1% of participants in the mobile unit and 3.5% in the at-home setup, while HbA1c values of 42-47 mmol/mol (6.0-6.4%) occurred in 9.1% and 15.2%, respectively.
conclusionsMobile units and at-home self-sampling are complementary screening approaches, finding similar rates of screen detection with HbA1c ≥48 mmol/mol (≥6.5%), though the latter is more efficient in detecting individuals with HbA1c values of 42-47 mmol/mol (6.0-6.4%).
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.