ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026
Estimated glucose disposal rate and severe abdominal aortic calcification: evidence from a nationally representative study with external validation.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Estimated glucose disposal rate (eGDR) is a validated surrogate marker of insulin resistance and has been associated with cardiometabolic risk. However, its relationship with abdominal aortic calcification (AAC) remains incompletely understood, and evidence from independent populations is limited. Methods: We analyzed data from 2,994 adults aged ≥20 years in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2013-2014. An independent external validation cohort including 745 participants was used to confirm the findings. Severe AAC was defined using the Kauppila scoring system. Multivariable logistic regression models were applied to evaluate the association between eGDR and severe AAC. Dose-response relationships were assessed using restricted cubic spline models, and subgroup analyses were performed to explore potential effect modification. Results: Lower eGDR levels were significantly associated with higher odds of severe AAC in both the NHANES cohort (fully adjusted OR per 1-unit increase: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.75-0.90) and the validation cohort (OR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69-0.91). Participants in the highest eGDR tertile had substantially lower odds of severe AAC compared with those in the lowest tertile in both cohorts. Restricted cubic spline analyses demonstrated an approximately linear inverse association between eGDR and severe AAC, with no evidence of nonlinearity. Similar findings were observed in the external validation cohort. Subgroup analyses showed consistent associations across most population strata. Conclusion: Lower eGDR is independently and linearly associated with a higher prevalence of severe AAC. These findings, validated in an independent cohort, support the potential utility of eGDR as a simple and accessible marker for identifying individuals at increased risk of vascular calcification.
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.