ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Sex-specific threshold effect of albumin-corrected fructosamine on diabetic retinopathy: a nonlinear relationship in women but linear in men - a cross-sectional study.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Albumin-corrected fructosamine (AlbF) is a short-term glycemic marker that can substitute for HbA1c when HbA1c is unreliable. Studies have linked AlbF to diabetic retinopathy (DR), but it is not known whether the dose-response curve differs between men and women. We investigated this in 1,090 type 2 diabetes patients (433 men, 657 women) from a single Chinese center. Methods: Restricted cubic splines were used to model the AlbF-DR relationship separately by sex, with threshold identification via segmented logistic regression. Models included age, BMI, diabetes duration, systolic blood pressure, HbA1c, HDL-C, and medications as covariates. Results: Each 10 μmol/g increase in AlbF raised DR risk in both sexes: men OR 1.83 (95% CI 1.39-2.41), women OR 1.58 (95% CI 1.26-1.99). The RCS curves told a different story. Men followed a linear pattern (P for nonlinearity = 0.751). Women showed a threshold near 62.0 μmol/g (P for nonlinearity < 0.001). Below that value, the OR was 2.57 (95% CI 1.74-3.81); above it, the association was no longer significant (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.69-2.42; P for interaction < 0.001). Sensitivity analyses consistently reproduced this nonlinear pattern. Conclusions: The AlbF-DR relationship is linear in men but follows a threshold model in women, with a change point near 62.0 μmol/g. Sex-specific risk modeling may improve DR stratification. Whether the threshold holds in practice will require prospective studies.
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.