Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2018
Can Periodical Examinations of Employees Be Useful in Detection of Glycaemia Impairment and Improving Patients' Adherence to Medical Recommendations?
Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preferences and Adherence of People with Prediabetes for Disease Management and Treatment: A Systematic Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Worldwide epidemiological data indicates insufficient diagnosis of diabetes as an increasing public health problem. In the search for solutions to this disadvantageous situation, occupational medicine health services seem to open up a unique opportunity to recognize some abnormalities in the early stages, especially among the asymptomatic working-age population. 316 workers underwent obligatory prophylactic examinations. In patients with twice assayed FGL ≥ 126 mg/dL (7.0 mmol/L) an additional intervention was implemented, including further diagnostic processes and therapy in General Practice (GP), followed by examination by an occupational health specialist within 3 months. The diagnosis of previously unknown diabetes was established among 2.5% of examined workers. All patients referred to the GP due to detected glycaemia impairment visited their doctor and finished the diagnostic process, took up therapy constrained by the occupational health physician to show the effects of intervention within 3 months. Prophylactic medical check-ups allow improved compliance and medical surveillance over glycaemia impairment in patients with prediabetes states, unknown diabetes or uncontrolled clinical course of diabetes. Considering fasting glucose level during mandatory prophylactic examination helps effective prevention of diabetes and its complications and thus provides public health system benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.