Evidence mapPaperPMID 42301151Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes investigation2026

Concordance of HbA1c, creatinine, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and total cholesterol between venous and self-collected capillary blood samples sent by mail.

Linda Hoffmeister, Christopher Schuchardt, Angelika Hafke, Eva Hummers, Alexandra Dopfer-Jablonka, Georg M N Behrens, Andrea Stölting, Louis Kuhnke, Julie Schanz, Frank Müller and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes investigation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors.

Linda HoffmeisterDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-6894-9836
Christopher SchuchardtDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany.
Angelika HafkeDepartment of Clinical Chemistry and Interdisciplinary UMG Laboratory, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Eva HummersDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2707-6067
Alexandra Dopfer-JablonkaDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Georg M N BehrensDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3111-621X
Andrea StöltingDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Louis KuhnkeDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Julie SchanzInterdisciplinary UMG-Laboratories and Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0552-5899
Frank MüllerDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9496-9423
Christine HappleDepartment of Rheumatology and Immunology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Dominik SchröderDepartment of General Practice, University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3564-4725

Funding

European Social Fund ZAM 5-87006761
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

INTRODUCTION/

aimsSelf-collected capillary blood sampling with postal shipment may improve access to routine monitoring of HbA1c, creatinine, and lipid parameters, but evidence on concordance with venous samples under real-world transport conditions remains limited. This study evaluated the concordance of HbA1c, creatinine, and lipid parameters between self-collected mailed capillary samples, mailed venous samples, and courier-transported venous samples. MATERIAL AND

methodsIn this cross-sectional study, participants scheduled for a blood draw in a general practice office self-collected a capillary blood sample using the Tasso+ device and provided additional venous blood samples. One venous sample was sent by mail (VMS) with the capillary blood sample (CMS). The other venous sample was couriered directly to the laboratory (VCS). HbA1c, creatinine, LDL, HDL, and total cholesterol were measured.

resultsSamples of 105 participants were analyzed. High concordance was observed between CMS and VCS for HbA1c (absolute mean bias = 0.028%, relative mean bias = 0.463%, concordance correlation coefficient [CCC] = 0.999) and creatinine (absolute mean bias = 0.037 mg/dL, relative mean bias = 4.815%, CCC = 0.972). VMS showed high agreement with VCS for HbA1c (absolute mean bias = 0.028%, relative mean bias = 0.450%, CCC = 0.998) and creatinine (absolute mean bias = 0.026 mg/dL, relative mean bias = 3.320%, CCC = 0.990). Lipid parameters demonstrated good concordance for CMS and VMS compared to VCS, with relative bias values ranging from 3.0% to 5.7% and CCCs >0.95.

conclusionsSelf-collected mailed capillary blood samples provide comparable HbA1c, creatinine, and lipid parameters to venous samples, even when sent by standard mail. Capillary self-sampling is a reliable method for remote monitoring of these parameters in diabetes management and screening.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBlood Specimen CollectionCholesterolCholesterol, HDLCholesterol, LDLCreatinineGlycated HemoglobinAdultAgedCapillariesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostal ServiceBiomarkersCholesterolCholesterol, HDLCholesterol, LDLCreatinineGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanCapillary bloodHbA1cSelf‐collection

Identifiers

PMID42301151
PMCPMC13399187

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.