SynthesisSystematic reviews2026
Incidence of acute myocardial infarction in people with diabetes compared to those without diabetes: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough diabetes mellitus is an established risk factor for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), epidemiological studies showed wide variations in the incidence of AMI in people with diabetes and inconsistent time trends. The objectives of the present systematic review were as follows: (i) to analyze the age-sex-adjusted incidence of both non-fatal and fatal AMI in people with diabetes compared to those without diabetes, (ii) to investigate corresponding time trends, and (iii) to identify sex differences.
methodsA systematic literature search was performed in the literature databases MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS until July 19, 2023, to identify population-based studies reporting the incidence of AMI in people with diabetes compared to those without diabetes according to our predefined inclusion criteria.
resultsIn total, 28 population-based cohort studies were included in this review. In women with diabetes, the incidence of AMI ranged from 102 to 690 per 100,000 person-years, and in men with diabetes from 206 to 1630. Estimates comparing people with and without diabetes ranged from 1.55 (95% CI 1.44-1.67) to 14.37 (8.43-24.47) in women and from 1.33 (1.18-1.51) to 4.17 (2.72-6.37) in men. Over the past four decades, the incidence of AMI declined in almost all studies in people without diabetes, but only in half of the studies in people with diabetes. There was considerable heterogeneity with regard to the definition of AMI, the population with diabetes, and geographic differences.
conclusionIncidence of AMI in people with diabetes remained significantly higher than in those without diabetes. A reduction in the incidence of AMI over time was observed in some, but not all reviewed studies in people with diabetes. There was no discernible trend of estimates comparing people with and without diabetes. These findings underscore the necessity for additional initiatives to prevent coronary heart disease in people with diabetes. The observed discrepancy in study results is presumably attributable to variations in the population and regional contexts, as well as to disparate methodological approaches. More standardized studies employing comparable methodologies are therefore required. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42 02014 5562.
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.