Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39747273›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Perspective from NHANES data: synergistic effects of visceral adiposity index and lipid accumulation products on diabetes risk.

JianHua He, Lei Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors.

JianHua HeThe Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Southeast Hospital of Chongqing, Chongqing, 401336, China.
Lei ChenThe Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Southeast Hospital of Chongqing, Chongqing, 401336, China. xmex2024@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to explore the synergistic effect of lipid accumulation product (LAP) and visceral adiposity index (VAI) on diabetes risk, and to evaluate the potential associations of these novel metabolic markers with diabetes. The current cross-sectional survey utilised data from the 2015-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The relationship between LAP and VAI levels and diabetes was examined using multiple logistic regression analysis. Moreover, threshold effects analysis and smoothed curve fitting were used as analytical techniques. The diabetes group exhibited significantly higher LAP (90.1 ± 84.1) and VAI (2.8 ± 2.8) levels compared to the non-diabetes group (p < 0.0001).After adjusting for confounding factors, LAP (OR = 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00-1.01, p < 0.0001) and VAI (OR = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.16-1.28, p < 0.0001) were independently associated with diabetes risk. The interaction term (LAP x VAI) showed a significant synergistic effect (OR = 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00-1.07, p = 0.0042).Diabetes risk significantly increased when LAP was below 97.70 (OR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.02-1.03, p < 0.0001) and when VAI was below 3.76 (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.69-2.08, p < 0.0001). According to this study, LAP and VAI are independent predictors of diabetes risk and exhibit a significant synergistic effect. Combining these indices may improve the accuracy of diabetes screening.

Indexed as

Lipid Accumulation ProductNutrition SurveysAdiposityAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesDiabetes MellitusFemaleHumansIntra-Abdominal FatMaleMiddle AgedObesity, AbdominalRisk FactorsDiabetesLipid accumulation productsNHANESPredictorsVisceral adiposity index

Identifiers

PMID39747273
PMCPMC11696142

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.