ArticleBMJ open diabetes research & care2022
Significance of pancreatic duodenal homeobox-1 (
Article in BMJ open diabetes research & care, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Role of Autophagy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: The Metabolic Clash.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2024Review
- Review
- Aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 polymorphism is an important gene for insulin resistance in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes.Metabolism open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPancreatic and duodenal homeobox factor-1 ( RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsWe performed a meal tolerance test (MTT) and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamping on 63 Japanese subjects, 30 with type 2 diabetes and 33 non-diabetic. We analyzed the rs1124607
resultsHOMA-beta (homeostatic model assessment beta-cell function) was significantly lower in the high-risk group than in the low-risk group for all subjects (72.9±54.2% vs 107.0±63.5%, p<0.05). Glucose levels and glucose area under the curve (AUC) were not significantly different between both the risk groups. The insulin levels at 60 and 120 min and the insulin AUC after MTT were remarkably lower in the high-risk group than those in the low-risk group for all subjects (AUC 75.7±36.7 vs 112.7±59.5, p<0.05). High-risk subjects with type 2 diabetes had significantly lower insulin levels at 30 and 60 min and insulin AUC than low-risk subjects. Non-diabetic high-risk subjects depicted significantly lower insulin levels at 120 and 180 min. There were negligible differences in insulin resistance between the risk groups.
conclusionsThese results suggest that the
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.