Identifying clinical criteria to predict Type 1 diabetes, as defined by absolute insulin deficiency: A systematic review protocol

BMJ Open

Volumn 2, Issue 6, 2012, Pages

  Shields, Beverley M ^a   Peters, Jaime L ^a   Cooper, Chris ^a   Powell, Roy J ^b   Knight, Bridget A ^a   Hyde, Christopher ^a   Hattersley, Andrew T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL DEVON AND EXETER NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

C PEPTIDE; INSULIN;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL FEATURE; DIABETIC PATIENT; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; DISEASE COURSE; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; GLYCEMIC CONTROL; HUMAN; INSULIN DEFICIENCY; INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 84873865359     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002309     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Diabetes UK. Diabetes in the UK 2010 (Mar 2010): Key statistics on diabetes, 2010.
2. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Clinical Guideline 15: Type 1 diabetes: diagnosis and management of type 1 diabetes in children, young people and adults. London: NICE, 2010.
3. The National Collaborating Centre for Chronic Conditions. TYPE 2 DIABETES: National clinical guideline for management in primary and secondary care (update). London: NICE, 2011.
4. International Diabetes Federation. Definition and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and intermediate hyperglycaemia: report of a WHO/IDF consultation. Geneva: WHO, 2006.
5. American Diabetes Association. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 2010;33(Suppl 1):S62-9.
6. Clark PM. Assays for insulin, proinsulin(s) and C-peptide. Ann Clin Biochem 1999;36(Pt 5):541-64.
7. Polonsky K, Frank B, Pugh W, et al. The limitations to and valid use of C-peptide as a marker of the secretion of insulin. Diabetes 1986;35:379-86.
8. Farmer A, Fox R. Diagnosis, classification, and treatment of diabetes. BMJ 2011;342:d3319.
9. de Lusignan S, Khunti K, Belsey J, et al. A method of identifying and correcting miscoding, misclassification and misdiagnosis in diabetes: a pilot and validation study of routinely collected data. Diabet Med 2010;27:203-9.
10. NHS Diabetes and Royal College of General Practitioners Working Group. Coding, Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes. Secondary Coding, Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes. 2010. http://www.diabetes.nhs.uk/ areas-of-care/diagnosis-and-ongoing-care/classification-of-diabetes/ (accessed 17 Dec 2012)
11. CRD. Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare. York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2009.
12. Greenhalgh T, Peacock R. Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources. BMJ 2005;331:1064-5.
13. Papaioannou D, Sutton A, Carroll C, et al. Literature searching for social science systematic reviews: consideration of a range of search techniques. Health Info Libr J 2010;27:114-22.
14. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and other categories of glucose intolerance. National Diabetes Data Group. Diabetes 1979;28:1039-57.
15. Moher D, Pham B, Klassen TP, et al. What contributions do languages other than English make on the results of meta-analyses? J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:964-72.
16. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000100-e00.
17. Whiting PF, Rutjes AWS, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011;155:529-36.
18. Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA. A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Stat Med 2001;20:2865-84.
19. Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA. Regression methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic test data. Acad Radiol 1995;2 Suppl 1:S48-56; discussion S65-7, S70-1 pas.
20. Macaskill P, Gatsonis C, Deeks JJ, et al. Analysing and presenting results. In: Deeks JJ, Bossuyt PM, CG, eds. Handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy version 1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2010. http://srdta.cochrane.org/sites/srdta.cochrane.org/files/uploads/ Chapter%2010%20-%20Version%201.0.pdf (accessed 17 Dec 2012)
21. Higgins J, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions VERSION 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org (accessed 17 Dec 2012)
22. Deeks JJ, Macaskill P, Irwig L. The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:882-93.