| dc.contributor.author | Vera-Ponce, V.J. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Zeñas-Trujillo, G.Z. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Loayza-Castro, J.A. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Zuzunaga-Montoya, F.E. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Valladares-Garrido, M.J. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-10-31T18:39:57Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2025-10-31T18:39:57Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2023 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12805/5773 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Introduction: Given the increase in cases of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) worldwide, and the limited access to laboratory analysis in several places, it is necessary to have the implementation of a simple, fast, and without-detection method. laboratory: the American Diabetes Association (ADA) risk test: the ADA test risk score (ADATRS). Objective: To carry out a systematic review (SR) with meta-analysis on the diagnostic utility of the ADATRS for prediabetes and DM2. Methodology: SR with meta-analysis of studies of diagnostic tests. The search was conducted in four databases: PubMed/Medline, SCOPUS, Web of Science and EMBASE. True positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives were obtained for each study. 2×2 tables were constructed based on the information from the article or from the authors. Thus, forest diagrams were presented with a 95% confidence interval (95%CI), both for the overall sensitivity and specificity of the ADATRS for both events of interest. Results: Forest plots revealed that the sensitivity and specificity for prediabetes were 0.91 (95%CI: 0.82-0.96) and 0.52 (95%CI: 0.36-0.67), respectively. While for DM2, the combined sensitivity and specificity were 0.85 (95%CI: 0.71-0.93) and 0.56 (95%CI: 0.47-0.65), respectively. Conclusions: Our systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature suggests that the ADATRS may be useful as a screening method for prediabetes and DM2, given its high sensitivity. However, there is a lot of heterogeneity and few studies even in this regard; therefore, more research work is needed in different populations and with more standardized methods to finally determine the clinical importance of this questionnaire as a screening or diagnostic tool for prediabetes or DM2. | en_US |
| dc.format | application/pdf | |
| dc.language.iso | spa | |
| dc.publisher | Asociación Española de Dietistas-Nutricionistas | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | urn:issn:2173-1292 | |
| dc.rights | https://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 | |
| dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ | |
| dc.subject | SDG 3 | en_US |
| dc.subject | Innovative Approaches in Diabetes Management and Monitoring | en_US |
| dc.subject | Diabetes Risk Assessment and Prevention Strategies | en_US |
| dc.title | Utilidad diagnóstica de la prueba de riesgo de la Asociación Americana de Diabetes para prediabetes y diabetes. Una revisión sistemática y metaanálisis | es_PE |
| dc.type | https://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.14306/renhyd.27.3.1915 | |
| dc.subject.ocde | https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.02.18 | |
| dc.type.other | Research article | |
| dc.identifier.journal | Revista Espanola de Nutricion Humana y Dietetica | |
| dc.type.version | https://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 | |