Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 604

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

HOMA-Estimated Insulin Resistance Is an Independent Predictor of Cardiovascular Disease in Type 2 Diabetic Subjects

Open access
Bonora, Enzo, Formentini, Gianni, Calcaterra, Francesco, Lombardi, Simonetta, Marini, Franco, Zenari, Luciano, Saggiani, Francesca, Poli, Maurizio, Perbellini, Sandro, Raffaelli, Andrea, Cacciatori, Vittorio, Santi, Lorenza, Targher, Giovanni, Bonadonna, Riccardo, Muggeo, Michele·2002·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—To evaluate whether homeostasis model assessment-estimated insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) is an independent predictor of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Conventional CVD risk factors (sex, age, smoking, plasma lipids, blood pressure, and metabolic control) and insulin resistance (estimated by HOMA) were evaluated at baseline in 1,326 patients with type 2 diabetes examined within the Verona Diabetes Complications Study. At baseline and after a mean follow-up of 4.5 years, CVD was assessed by medical history, physical examination, electrocardiography, and echo-Doppler of carotid and lower limb arteries. Death certificates and medical records of subjects who died during the follow-up were carefully scrutinized to identify cardiovascular deaths. In statistical analyses, CVD was an aggregate end point including both fatal and nonfatal coronary, cerebrovascular, and peripheral vascular disease as well as ischemic electrocardiographic abnormalities and vascular lesions identified by echo-Doppler. RESULTS—At baseline, 441 subjects were coded positive for CVD (prevalent cases). Incident cases numbered 126. Multiple logistic regression analyses showed that, along with sex, age, smoking, HDL/total cholesterol ratio, and hypertension, HOMA-IR was an independent predictor of both prevalent and incident CVD. A 1-unit increase in (log)HOMA-IR value was associated with an odds ratio for prevalent CVD at baseline of 1.31 (95% CI 1.10–1.56, P = 0.002) and for incident CVD during follow-up of 1.56 (95% CI 1.14–2.12, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS—HOMA-IR is an independent predictor of CVD in type 2 diabetes. The improvement of insulin resistance might have beneficial effects not only on glucose control but also on CVD in patients with type 2 diabetes.

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 · 10.2337/diacare.25.7.1135

Cites

10 of 10 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

Cited by

See all 604

Metadata

Authors
Bonora, E., Formentini, G., Calcaterra, F., Lombardi, S., Marini, F., Zenari, L., Saggiani, F., Poli, M., Perbellini, S., Raffaelli, A., Cacciatori, V., Santi, L., Targher, G., Bonadonna, R., & Muggeo, M.
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2002-07-01
Volume
25
Issue
7
Pages
1135-1141
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2101725562
Cited by
604
References
10
FWCI
14.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

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.