Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia
Diagnostic accuracy of ADA 2020 criteria for undiagnosed diabetes in a Peruvian population
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem
| dc.contributor.author | Albitres Flores, Julio Leonardo Rafael | |
| dc.contributor.author | Bernabé Ortiz, Antonio | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-12-14T16:06:00Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2020-12-14T16:06:00Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12866/8650 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Aims: To assess the prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes (UDD) and the diagnostic accuracy of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) criteria to detect UDD cases in a Peruvian population. Methods: Population-based cross-sectional study. UDD was defined using fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2-hour post-prandial plasma glucose (2 h-PPG), and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) traditional cut-offs. Diagnostic accuracy was estimated using areas under the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve, compared with the combination of oral glucose tolerance test (FPG plus 2 h-PPG) plus HbA1c as gold standard. Results: 1609 subjects were evaluated; mean age 48.2 (SD: 10.6) years, 50.3% were women. A total of 179 (11.3%) subjects were classified as having diabetes, 41.3% of them had UDD. Area under the curve for FPG, 2 h-PPG and HbA1c was 86.5% (95% CI: 81.4–91.6%); 87.2% (95% CI: 82.2–92.2%) and 80.4% (95% CI: 74.8–86.0%), respectively. FPG sensitivity was 73.0%, whereas this value was 74.3% for 2 h-PPG and 60.8% for HbA1c. Of 74 UDD cases, 45 were positive for HbA1c, 54 for FPG and 55 for 2 h-PPG. Conclusions: 41.3% of people with diabetes do not know their diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracy of FPG and 2 h-PPG was higher than HbA1c. The most sensitive combination of two tests to detect UDD cases was FPG plus 2 h-PPG. © 2020 Elsevier B.V. | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | eng | |
| dc.publisher | Elsevier | |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice | |
| dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess | |
| dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es | |
| dc.subject | Diabetes mellitus | en_US |
| dc.subject | Epidemiology | en_US |
| dc.subject | Sensitivity and specificity | en_US |
| dc.subject | ROC curve | en_US |
| dc.title | Diagnostic accuracy of ADA 2020 criteria for undiagnosed diabetes in a Peruvian population | en_US |
| dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | |
| dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2020.108475 | |
| dc.subject.ocde | https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.02.18 | |
| dc.relation.issn | 1872-8227 |
Ficheros en el ítem
| Ficheros | Tamaño | Formato | Ver |
|---|---|---|---|
|
No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem. |
|||
Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)
-
Artículos en revistas indizadas [4988]
Recuperados de bases de datos bibliográficas
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
