Cited by 54Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Treatment and Management

Performance Characteristics of the New Definition of Diabetes

Open access
Lorenzo, Carlos, Haffner, Steven M.·2010·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: A1C ≥6.5% has been recently proposed as the defining criterion for diabetes. However, performance characteristics of this definition have not been described. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In the Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study, we compared new to previous definitions of diabetes: 1999 World Health Organization (DM1999WHO) and 2003 American Diabetes Association based on fasting glucose alone (DMFPG126). RESULTS: Participants with A1C ≥6.5%, DM1999WHO, and DMFPG126 were 44 (5.2%), 132 (15.4%), and 61 (7.1%), respectively. In individuals with DM1999WHO, mean, median, and interquartile range of A1C were 6.3, 5.9, and 5.5–6.6%, respectively; in individuals with DMFPG126, mean, median, and interquartile range of A1C were 7.0, 6.6, and 6.0–7.1%. CONCLUSIONS: A1C ≥6.5% identifies fewer individuals than DM1999WHO or DMFPG126. Studies are needed to determine that A1C ≥6.5% compromises neither blood pressure and lipid management in early diabetes nor the implementation of lifestyle interventions for diabetes prevention.

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 · 10.2337/dc09-1357

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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 IEC A1C criteria have recently been compared with testing with fasting glucose or OGTTs in various populations to diagnose diabetes and high-risk/pre-diabetes.

    “The IEC A1C criteria have recently been compared with testing with fasting glucose or oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) in various populations to diagnose diabetes (7–13) and high-risk/pre-diabetes (10,11,13), but the ADA A1C criteria have not been studied.”

    From Screening for Diabetes and Pre-Diabetes With Proposed A1C-Based Diagnostic Criteria (2010) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Methods and Results compare the IEC A1C diabetes threshold with fasting-glucose and WHO criteria incorporating two-hour glucose testing in IRAS participants. The paper also examines the A1C 6.0–6.4% high-risk category, but does not directly compare A1C with glucose-based criteria for diagnosing pre-diabetes. Its findings come from one study population; the sentence cites several papers for the broader claim about various populations. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Problems with the IEC criteria have been reported with diverse populations.

    “Further studies would be required before our findings with the ADA criteria could be generalized to other racial/ethnic groups, but problems with the IEC criteria have been reported with diverse populations (8,9,12).”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lorenzo, C., & Haffner, S. M.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
Corresponding author
Lorenzo, Carlos
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2009-10-30
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
335-337
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2156892298
Cited by
53
References
16
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
FWCI
6.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
  • National Institutes of Health (5u01hl047890-09, 5u01hl047887-09, 5u01hl047889-09)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U01HL047902, HL-47889, HL‐47890, HL47887, U01HL047892, HL 47892)
  • National Center for Research Resources (M01RR01346, M01RR001346, M01-RR431)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
diabetes diagnosis, HbA1c, diagnostic criteria, fasting blood glucose, Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study, sensitivity and specificity, diabetes prevention
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Fasting, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Insulin Resistance, ROC Curve, United States, World Health Organization, Incidence, Atherosclerosis

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