Cited by 30Dialysis and Renal Disease ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchClinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control

The G lycemic I ndices in D ialysis E valuation (GIDE) study: Comparative measures of glycemic control in diabetic dialysis patients

Williams, Mark E., Mittman, Neal, Ma, Lin, Brennan, Julia I., Mooney, Ann, Johnson, Curtis D., Jani, Chinu M., Maddux, Franklin W. +1 more·2015·Hemodialysis International

Abstract

The validity of hemoglobin A1c (HgbA1c) is undergoing increasing scrutiny in the advanced CKD/ESRD (chronic kidney disease/end-stage renal disease) population, where it appears to be discordant from other glycemic indices. In the Glycemic Indices in Dialysis Evaluation (GIDE) Study, we sought to assess correlation of HgbA1c with casual glucose, glycated albumin, and serum fructosamine in a large group of diabetic patients on dialysis. From 26 dialysis facilities in the United States, 1758 diabetic patients (hemodialysis = 1476, peritoneal dialysis = 282) were enrolled in the first quarter of 2013. The distributions of HgbA1c and the other glycemic indices were analyzed. Intra-patient coefficients of variation and correlations among the four glycemic indices were determined. Patients with low HgbA1c values were both on higher erythropoietin (ESA) doses and more anemic. Serum glucose exhibited the highest intra-patient variability over a 3-month period; variability was modest among the other glycemic indices, and least with HgbA1c. Statistical analyses inclusive of all glycemic markers indicated modest to strong correlations. HgbA1c was more likely to be in the target range than glycated albumin or serum fructosamine, suggesting factors which may or may not be directly related to glycemic control, including anemia, ESA management, and iron administration, in interpreting HgbA1c values. These initial results from the GIDE Study clarify laboratory correlations among glycemic indi…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/hdi.12312

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Williams, M. E., Mittman, N., Ma, L., Brennan, J. I., Mooney, A., Johnson, C. D., Jani, C. M., Maddux, F. W., & Lacson, E.
Affiliations
  • Joslin Diabetes Center (US)
  • Department of Dialysis Kidney Care of Brooklyn and Queens Brooklyn New York USA
  • Fresenius Medical Care (United States) (US)
  • Department of Research Spectra Laboratories Rockleigh New Jersey USA
Corresponding author
Williams, Mark E.
Venue
Hemodialysis International
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-05-12
Volume
19
Issue
4
Pages
562-571
ISSN
  • 1492-7535 (ISSN-L)
  • 1542-4758
OpenAlex
W2139255580
Cited by
30
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2
FWCI
3.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Hemodialysis International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
Keywords
glycemic control, HbA1c, glycated albumin, serum fructosamine, diabetes mellitus, dialysis, end-stage renal disease, chronic kidney disease, anemia, erythropoietin, iron therapy, intrapatient variability
MeSH terms
Aged, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Renal Dialysis, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Kidney Failure, Chronic, Male, Middle Aged, Cohort Studies, Glycemic Index

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