ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Cross-sectional associations and incremental discrimination of inflammatory and lipid-derived indices for prevalent coronary heart disease in type 2 diabetes.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Routine blood-count and lipid-derived indices may be associated with coronary heart disease (CHD) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), but comparative evidence within one cohort is limited. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 3,964 adults with T2DM. Six inflammatory and three lipid-derived indices were examined using quartile-based and standardized continuous logistic regression. Domain-specific covariate sets avoided adjustment for constituent lipids. Dose-response, subgroup, and temporal sensitivity analyses were performed. Incremental discrimination was assessed against a common clinical base model with bootstrap optimism correction. Calibration and decision curves were based on cross-validated estimated probabilities; high-sensitivity C-reactive protein was a benchmark. Results: CHD was present in 1,350 participants (34.1%). Median SII was 649 × 10 Conclusion: Several indices were associated with prevalent CHD, without consistent evidence that SII was superior.
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.