The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Executive Summary: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2011
Open accessAbstract
Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2011Current criteria for the diagnosis of diabetes • A1C Ն6.5%.The test should be performed in a laboratory using a method that is National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP)-certified and standardized to the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) assay • fasting plasma glucose (FPG) Ն126 mg/dl (7.0 mmol/l).Fasting is defined as no caloric intake for at least 8 h, or • 2-h plasma glucose Ն200 mg/dl (11.1 mmol/l) during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).The test should be performed as described by the World Health Organization, using a glucose load containing the equivalent of 75 g anhydrous glucose dissolved in water • in a patient with classic symptoms of hyperglycemia or hyperglycemic crisis, a random plasma glucose Ն200 mg/dl (11.1 mmol/l) • in the absence of unequivocal hyperglycemia, result should be confirmed by repeat testing.Testing for diabetes in asymptomatic patients • Testing to detect type 2 diabetes and assess risk for future diabetes in asymptomatic people should be considered in adults of any age who are overweight or obese (BMI Ն25 kg/m 2 ) and who have one or more additional risk factors for diabetes (see Table 4 of the "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2011").In those without these risk factors, testing should begin at age 45 years.(B) • If tests are normal, repeat testing carried out at least at 3-year intervals is reasonable.(E) • To test for diabetes or to assess risk of future diabetes, A1C, FPG, or 2-h 75-g OGTT are appropriate.(B) • In those identified with increased risk for future diabetes, identify and, if ap-propriate, treat other cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors.(B)
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Global Prevalence of Diabetic Retinopathy and Projection of Burden through 2045
Teo, Z. L., Tham, Y.-C., Yu, M., Chee, M. L., Rim, T. H., Cheung, N., Bikbov, M. M., Wang, Y. X., Tang, Y., Lu, Y., et al. (2021) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2021.04.027 · Cited by 2,420
Rodbard, H. W., Jellinger, P. S., Davidson, J. A., Einhorn, D., Garber, A. J., Grunberger, G., Handelsman, Y., Horton, E. S., Lebovitz, H., Levy, P., et al. (2009) · Endocrine Practice · doi:10.4158/ep.15.6.540 · Cited by 942
Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS) 2: Prognostic Factor Research
Riley, R. D., Hayden, J. A., Steyerberg, E. W., Moons, K. G. M., Abrams, K., Kyzas, P. A., Malats, N., Briggs, A., Schroter, S., Altman, D. G., et al. (2013) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001380 · Cited by 823
Bariatric surgery and prevention of type 2 diabetes in Swedish obese subjects
Carlsson, L. M. S., Peltonen, M., Ahlin, S., Anveden, Å., Bouchard, C., Carlsson, B., Jacobson, P., Lönroth, H., Maglio, C., Näslund, I., et al. (2012) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1112082 · Cited by 794
Type 2 diabetes mellitus and testosterone: a meta-analysis study: Type 2 diabetes and testosterone
Corona, G., Monami, M., Rastrelli, G., Aversa, A., Sforza, A., Lenzi, A., Forti, G., Mannucci, E., & Maggi, M. (2011) · International Journal of Andrology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2605.2010.01117.x · Cited by 370
Metadata
- Venue
- Diabetes Care
- Publisher
- American Diabetes Association
- Published
- 2011-01-01
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- Supplement_1
- Pages
- S4-S10
- ISSN
- 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-5548
- OpenAlex
- W4212932248
- Cited by
- 512
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 43.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Executive Summary: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2011. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2337/dc11-s004
- The paper
- Executive Summary: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2011. (2011). Diabetes Care. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc11-s004
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.