| Title |
Diabetes screening in overweight and obese children and adolescents: choosing the right test
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Pediatrics, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00431-016-2807-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefan Ehehalt, Susanna Wiegand, Antje Körner, Roland Schweizer, Klaus-Peter Liesenkötter, Carl-Joachim Partsch, Gunnar Blumenstock, Ulrike Spielau, Christian Denzer, Michael B. Ranke, Andreas Neu, Gerhard Binder, Martin Wabitsch, Wieland Kiess, Thomas Reinehr |
| Abstract |
Type 2 diabetes can occur without any symptoms, and health problems associated with the disease are serious. Screening tests allowing an early diagnosis are desirable. However, optimal screening tests for diabetes in obese youth are discussed controversially. We performed an observational multicenter analysis including 4848 (2668 female) overweight and obese children aged 7 to 17 years without previously known diabetes. Using HbA1c and OGTT as diagnostic criteria, 2.4% (n = 115, 55 female) could be classified as having diabetes. Within this group, 68.7% had HbA1c levels ≥48 mmol/mol (≥6.5%). FPG ≥126 mg/dl (≥7.0 mmol/l) and/or 2-h glucose levels ≥200 mg/dl (≥11.1 mmol/l) were found in 46.1%. Out of the 115 cases fulfilling the OGTT and/or HbA1c criteria for diabetes, diabetes was confirmed in 43.5%. For FPG, the ROC analysis revealed an optimal threshold of 98 mg/dl (5.4 mmol/l) (sensitivity 70%, specificity 88%). For HbA1c, the best cut-off value was 42 mmol/mol (6.0%) (sensitivity 94%, specificity 93%). HbA1c seems to be more reliable than OGTT for diabetes screening in overweight and obese children and adolescents. The optimal HbA1c threshold for identifying patients with diabetes was found to be 42 mmol/mol (6.0%). What is Known: • The prevalence of obesity is increasing and health problems related to type 2 DM can be serious. However, an optimal screening test for diabetes in obese youth seems to be controversial in the literature. What is New: • In our study, the ROC analysis revealed for FPG an optimal threshold of 98 mg/dl (5.4 mmol/l, sensitivity 70%, specificity 88%) and for HbA1c a best cut-off value of 42 mmol/mol (6.0%, sensitivity 94%, specificity 93%) to detect diabetes. Thus, in overweight and obese children and adolescents, HbA1c seems to be a more reliable screening tool than OGTT. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 33% |
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 68 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 24% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 22% |
| Unknown | 16 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 16% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 18 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 November 2016.
All research outputs
#15,395,259
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Pediatrics
#2,801
of 3,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249,996
of 415,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Pediatrics
#36
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,730 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 415,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.