Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23438147›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2013

Shifting from glucose diagnosis to the new HbA1c diagnosis reduces the capability of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) to screen for glucose abnormalities within a real-life primary healthcare preventive strategy.

Bernardo Costa, Francisco Barrio, Josep L Piñol, Joan J Cabré, Xavier Mundet, Ramon Sagarra, Jordi Salas-Salvadó, Oriol Solà-Morales, DE-PLAN-CAT/PREDICE Research Group

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Atencion primaria · 2018
    Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Prediabetes: what are we talking about?Advances in laboratory medicine · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Different type 2 diabetes risk assessments predict dissimilar numbers at 'high risk': a retrospective analysis of diabetes risk-assessment tools.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Bernardo CostaJordi Gol Primary Care Research Institute, Reus-Tarragona Diabetes Research Group, Catalan Health Institute, Primary Health Care Division, Camí de Riudoms 53-55, 43202, Reus, Spain. costaber@gmail.com
Francisco Barrio
Josep L Piñol
Joan J Cabré
Xavier Mundet
Ramon Sagarra
Jordi Salas-Salvadó
Oriol Solà-Morales
DE-PLAN-CAT/PREDICE Research Group
Primary Health Care · QAInstitut d'Investigació Sanitària Pere Virgili · ESSpanish Biomedical Research Centre in Physiopathology of Obesity and Nutrition · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo investigate differences in the performance of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) as a screening tool for glucose abnormalities after shifting from glucose-based diagnostic criteria to the proposed new hemoglobin (Hb)A1c-based criteria.

methodsA cross-sectional primary-care study was conducted as the first part of an active real-life lifestyle intervention to prevent type 2 diabetes within a high-risk Spanish Mediterranean population. Individuals without diabetes aged 45-75 years (n = 3,120) were screened using the FINDRISC. Where feasible, a subsequent 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test and HbA1c test were also carried out (n = 1,712). The performance of the risk score was calculated by applying the area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating characteristic, using three sets of criteria (2-hour glucose, fasting glucose, HbA1c) and three diagnostic categories (normal, pre-diabetes, diabetes).

resultsDefining diabetes by a single HbA1c measurement resulted in a significantly lower diabetes prevalence (3.6%) compared with diabetes defined by 2-hour plasma glucose (9.2%), but was not significantly lower than that obtained using fasting plasma glucose (3.1%). The FINDRISC at a cut-off of 14 had a reasonably high ability to predict diabetes using the diagnostic criteria of 2-hour or fasting glucose (AUC = 0.71) or all glucose abnormalities (AUC = 0.67 and 0.69, respectively). When HbA1c was used as the primary diagnostic criterion, the AUC for diabetes detection dropped to 0.67 (5.6% reduction in comparison with either 2-hour or fasting glucose) and fell to 0.55 for detection of all glucose abnormalities (17.9% and 20.3% reduction, respectively), with a relevant decrease in sensitivity of the risk score.

conclusionsA shift from glucose-based diagnosis to HbA1c-based diagnosis substantially reduces the ability of the FINDRISC to screen for glucose abnormalities when applied in this real-life primary-care preventive strategy.

Indexed as

Blood GlucoseAgedClinical MedicineCross-Sectional StudiesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Epidemiologic MethodsFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansLife StyleMaleMiddle AgedPrevalencePrimary Health CareRisk AssessmentBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, human

Identifiers

PMID23438147
PMCPMC3621796
OpenAlexW2135868058

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.