ArticleJournal of diabetes research2026
Association Between Albumin-Corrected Anion Gap and Prevalent Prediabetes or Diabetes Mellitus: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of NHANES 2005-2010.
Article in Journal of diabetes research, 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
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to explore the cross-sectional association between albumin-corrected anion gap (ACAG) and the composite outcome of prediabetes or diabetes mellitus (PD-DM) using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2005-2010.
methodsA cross-sectional analysis was conducted, comprising 3937 adult participants aged ≥ 20 years, who were categorized into two groups: those with PD-DM and those without PD-DM. The baseline characteristics were compared using the most appropriate statistical tests. Logistic regression analyses, restricted cubic spline (RCS), subgroup analyses, interaction tests, and sensitivity analyses were performed to investigate the cross-sectional relationship between ACAG and PD-DM. Net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) were computed to assess whether ACAG offered incremental predictive value for PD-DM.
resultsParticipants with PD-DM exhibited higher ACAG levels (15.02 vs. 14.14, p < 0.01). Each unit increase in ACAG was associated with 1.16-fold higher odds of PD-DM after full adjustment (odds ratio [OR] = 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-1.23; p < 0.01). RCS showed that ACAG was linearly associated with PD-DM (p for nonlinearity = 0.48). Subgroup analyses revealed a stronger association in females and lower poverty income ratio (PIR) groups (p for interaction < 0.05). NRI and IDI analyses confirmed that incorporating ACAG into the baseline model significantly improved risk discrimination and reclassification for PD-DM (all p < 0.01). Sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness.
conclusionThis cross-sectional study demonstrated that ACAG is positively associated with PD-DM, especially among females and lower PIR participants. ACAG also showed significant incremental predictive value for PD-DM risk prediction. Because of the cross-sectional design, causal inference cannot be established. Further large-scale prospective studies are still needed to elucidate the role of ACAG in the development of PD-DM.
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.