ArticleBMJ open diabetes research & care2026
Feasibility of using OGTT 1-h PG as a diagnostic criterion for diabetes and pre-diabetes.
Article in BMJ open diabetes research & care, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo investigate whether oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) 1-hour plasma glucose (1-h PG) concentration can be used as the criterion for diagnosing diabetes mellitus (DM) and pre-diabetes. MATERIALS AND
methodsData were collected from 1021 outpatients who completed a 5-point OGTT. The χ
resultsThe prevalence rates of diabetes and pre-diabetes were 34.1% and 24.4% based on the American Diabetes Association (ADA) standard, 42.4% and 21.8% when OGTT 2-h PG was replaced with OGTT 1-h PG, and 44.4% and 20.8% when the OGTT 1-h PG was added to the ADA criteria. According to the WHO criteria, the prevalence rates of diabetes and pre-diabetes were 30.4% and 19.2%, 40.5% and 21.8% when OGTT 2-h PG was replaced with OGTT 1-h PG, and 43.9% and 22.2% when the OGTT 1-h PG was added to the WHO criteria. Substituting OGTT 1-h PG for OGTT 2-h PG in the ADA diagnostic strategy still retained good consistency for both diabetes (κ=0.7, 95% CI 70.1% to 78.4%) and pre-diabetes (κ=0.7, 95% CI 64.5% to 75.0%). For diabetes, the area under the curves (AUC) was 93.7% (95% CI 92.2% to 95.1%) for OGTT 1-h PG and 96.1% (95% CI 94.7% to 97.3%) for OGTT 2-h PG. For pre-diabetes, the AUC was 71.8% (95% CI 67.9% to 75.8%) for OGTT 1-h PG and 70.4% (95% CI 65.9% to 74.5%) for OGTT 2-h PG.
conclusionsThe DM prevalence would be significantly higher if the OGTT 1-h PG was adopted as the diagnostic criterion. More prospective studies are needed to validate its clinical utility.
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.