Cited by 84Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Management and ResearchAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases

The Metabolic Syndrome (Emperor) Wears No Clothes

Kahn, Richard·2006·Diabetes Care

Abstract

There are several key features of the metabolic syndrome that virtually all interested individuals and organizations agree upon. First, that certain “metabolic” factors tend to associate with each other more often than chance would dictate. Second, these risk factors taken alone or in any possible combination are associated with an elevated risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes. Third, there is no definitive treatment for the “syndrome” per se. Rather, therapy is individualized according to the degree to which any specific risk factor(s) is present in a patient, and everyone with any risk factor(s) should be given lifestyle modification counseling. Finally, despite over 10,000 articles on the subject, there is much missing information. It is this last fact that has lead to the concern and consternation voiced by some organizations (1) and individuals (2–6). That is, the basic question is whether we know enough about this constellation of risk factors to warrant adopting a unique clinical construct that has value to either physicians or patients. After all, the fundamental purpose of a medical label (diagnosis) is to inform physicians and/or patients to take (or not take) action that would otherwise be different. In this issue of Diabetes Care (7) and recently elsewhere (8), Scott Grundy, MD, PhD, perhaps the chief proponent of the syndrome as a clinical construct, defends its existence with a variety of arguments. Although he suggests the basic disagreement is one of “differences in perspectives and biases [between the] cardiovascular and diabetes communities” (7) and that it may boil down to “how to integrate the metabolic syndrome into concepts of insulin resistance, pre-diabetes, and type 2 diabetes” (8), in fact, the issues are much more fundamental, speak to the lack of a solid evidence base, and raise concerns that are critical to a core premise …

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/dc06-0671

Cites

32 of 32 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?

  • The term Metabolic Syndrome remains the most widely accepted name to describe the cluster of metabolically related CVD risk factors despite attempts to discard it as a clinical entity.

    “The term Metabolic Syndrome remains the most widely accepted name to describe this cluster of metabolically related CVD risk factors 40 despite vigorous attempts to discard the syndrome as a clinical entity 43, 53.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kahn, R.
Affiliations
American Diabetes Association (US)
Corresponding author
Kahn, Richard
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2006-07-01
Volume
29
Issue
7
Pages
1693-1696
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2166715351
Cited by
84
References
32
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
11.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Adipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases
Keywords
metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular risk, type 2 diabetes, insulin resistance, prediabetes, diagnosis, risk factor clustering, lifestyle modification, evidence base

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