ArticleCureus2021
Knowledge of Hemoglobin A1c and Glycemic Control in an Urban Population.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond blood pressure: carotid intima-media thickness uncovers subclinical atherosclerosis in normotensive adults with type 2 diabetes in Sub-Saharan Africa.Cardiovascular diabetology. Endocrinology reports · 2026Article
- Can self-rated health be useful to primary care physicians as a diagnostic indicator of metabolic dysregulations amongst patients with type 2 diabetes? A population-based study.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Supermarket health advocacy, resources, and education: feasibility of a supermarket-based prediabetes and diabetes screening and education program.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of "Rule of Seven" intervention in improving control status in diabetes mellitus protocol of a randomized controlled trial.Journal of education and health promotion · 2024Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimOur study aims to assess the knowledge of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and glycemic control in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) at an urban academic institution.
methodsThis was a retrospective cross-sectional study that included a survey of 100 adult patients with DM. Our patient cohort was divided into those with recent HbA1c < 8.0% and those with HbA1c ≥ 8.0% for subgroup analysis.
resultsThe majority (71%) of patients correctly defined HbA1c and half were aware of their HbA1c target, but they were unable to correlate the correct average blood glucose for an HbA1c level of 7%. Worse control, defined as an HbA1c level of ≥ 8%, was associated with co-morbid disease, but was not associated with understanding HbA1c definition, target or socioeconomic disparities. Perceived glycemic control was congruent with the actual control in 46% of our patients. Ninety percent of those with HbA1c ≥ 8% perceived their control to be better than it actually was, and 97% of those with HbA1c < 8% perceived their control worse than it actually was (P < 0.00001).
conclusionAlthough most patients knew the definition of HbA1c, they were unable to correlate HbA1c with average blood sugar. There remain opportunities to increase education for this vulnerable population with co-morbid disease on the use of the HbA1c disease marker as an education tool.
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.