Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 189

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Relationship Between Fasting Plasma Glucose and Glycosylated Hemoglobin: Potential for False-Positive Diagnoses of Type 2 Diabetes Using New Diagnostic Criteria

Davidson, Mayer B., Schriger, David L., Peters, Anne L., Lorber, Brett·1999·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: New criteria for the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus have recently been introduced that lowered the diagnostic fasting plasma glucose (FPG) concentration from 7.8 to 7.0 mmol/L (140 to 126 mg/dL). OBJECTIVE: To determine if individuals with diabetes diagnosed by the new FPG concentration criterion would have excessive glycosylation (elevated hemoglobin [HbA1c] levels). DEFINITIONS: We determined the distribution of HbA1c levels in individuals using 4 classifications: (1) normal by the new criterion (FPG concentration <6.1 mmol/L [110 mg/dL]); (2) impaired fasting glucose by the new criterion (FPG concentration of 6.1-6.9 mmol/L [110-125 mg/dL]); (3) diabetes diagnosed solely by the new FPG concentration criterion of 7.0 through 7.7 mmol/L (126-139 mg/dL); and (4) diabetes diagnosed by the previous FPG concentration criterion of 7.8 mmol/L (140 mg/dL) or higher. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of 2 large data sets (NHANES III and Meta-Analysis Research Group [MRG] on the Diagnosis of Diabetes Using Glycated Hemoglobin) that contained individuals in whom FPG concentrations, 2-hour glucose concentrations using an oral glucose tolerance test, and an HbA1c level were simultaneously measured. We cross-tabulated FPG concentrations (<6.1 mmol/L [110 mg/dL], 6.1-6.9 mmol/L [110-125 mg/dL], 7.0-7.7 mmol/L [126-139 mg/dL], and > or =7.8 mmol/L [140 mg/dL]) and HbA1c levels separated into 3 intervals: normal, less than the upper limit of normal (ULN); slightly elevated, ULN to ULN plus 1%; and high, higher than ULN plus 1%. RESULTS: Among subjects with normal FPG concentrations, HbA1c levels in the NHANES III (and the MRG) data sets were normal in 97.3% (96.2%), slightly elevated in 2.7% (3.6%), and high in 0.1% (0.2%). Among individuals with impaired fasting glucose, HbA1c concentrations were normal in 86.7% (81.4%), slightly elevated in 13.1% (16.4%), and high in 0.2% (2.2%). Among diabetic patients diagnosed by the new FPG criterion only, HbA1c levels were normal in 60.9% (59.6%), slightly elevated in 35.8% (32.8%), and high in 3.4% (7.6%). In diabetic patients diagnosed by the former FPG criterion, HbA1c levels were normal in 18.6% (16.7%), slightly elevated in 32.5% (21.0%), and high in 48.9% (62.3%). CONCLUSIONS: About 60% of the new cohort of diabetic patients in both data sets have normal HbA1c levels. We believe that diabetes should not be diagnosed in those with FPG concentrations less than 7.8 mmol/L (140 mg/dL) unless excessive glycosylation is evident. Individuals without excessive glycosylation but with moderate elevations of FPG concentrations (6.1-7.7 mmol/L [110-139 mg/dL]) should be diagnosed as having impaired fasting glucose and treated with an appropriate diet and exercise. This diagnostic labeling achieves the goal of early intervention without subjecting these persons to the potentially negative insurance, employment, social, and psychological consequences of a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.281.13.1203

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 189

Metadata

Authors
Davidson, M. B., Schriger, D. L., Peters, A. L., & Lorber, B.
Venue
JAMA
Published
1999-04-07
Volume
281
Issue
13
Pages
1203
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2113628803
Cited by
189
References
3
FWCI
7.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Relationship Between Fasting Plasma Glucose and Glycosylated Hemoglobin: Potential for False-Positive Diagnoses of Type 2 Diabetes Using New Diagnostic Criteria. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.281.13.1203
The paper
Davidson, M. B., Schriger, D. L., Peters, A. L., & Lorber, B. (1999). Relationship Between Fasting Plasma Glucose and Glycosylated Hemoglobin: Potential for False-Positive Diagnoses of Type 2 Diabetes Using New Diagnostic Criteria. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.281.13.1203

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.