OBJECTIVE: The objective was to create a diabetes register and to evaluate the validity of the clinical diabetes diagnosis and its classification. DESIGN: The diabetes register was created by linkage of databases in primary and secondary care, the pharmaceutical database, and ongoing population-based health surveys in the county. Diagnosis and classification were validated by specialists in diabetology or general practitioners with special competence in diabetology. Analysis of autoantibodies associated with type 1 diabetes was used for classification. SETTING: Primary and secondary health care in the county of Västerbotten, Sweden. PATIENTS: Patients with diabetes (median age at diagnosis 56 years, inter quartile range 50-60 years) who had participated in the Västerbotten Intervention Programme (VIP) and accepted participation in a diabetes register. RESULTS: Of all individuals with diabetes in VIP, 70% accepted to participate in the register. The register included 3256 (M/F 1894/1362) diabetes patients. The vast majority (95%) had data confirming the diabetes diagnoses according to WHO recommendations. Unspecified diabetes was the most common (54.6%) classification by the general practitioners. After assessment by specialists and analysis of autoantibodies the majority were classified as type 2 diabetes (76.8%). Type 1 diabetes was the second largest group (7.2%), including a sub-group of patients with latent autoimmune diabetes (4.8%). CONCLUSION: It was concluded that it is feasible to create a diabetes register based on information in medical records in general practice. However, special attention should be paid to the validity of the diabetes diagnosis and its classification.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to create a diabetes register and to evaluate the validity of the clinical diabetes diagnosis and its classification. DESIGN: The diabetes register was created by linkage of databases in primary and secondary care, the pharmaceutical database, and ongoing population-based health surveys in the county. Diagnosis and classification were validated by specialists in diabetology or general practitioners with special competence in diabetology. Analysis of autoantibodies associated with type 1 diabetes was used for classification. SETTING: Primary and secondary health care in the county of Västerbotten, Sweden. PATIENTS: Patients with diabetes (median age at diagnosis 56 years, inter quartile range 50-60 years) who had participated in the Västerbotten Intervention Programme (VIP) and accepted participation in a diabetes register. RESULTS: Of all individuals with diabetes in VIP, 70% accepted to participate in the register. The register included 3256 (M/F 1894/1362) diabetespatients. The vast majority (95%) had data confirming the diabetes diagnoses according to WHO recommendations. Unspecifieddiabetes was the most common (54.6%) classification by the general practitioners. After assessment by specialists and analysis of autoantibodies the majority were classified as type 2 diabetes (76.8%). Type 1 diabetes was the second largest group (7.2%), including a sub-group of patients with latent autoimmune diabetes (4.8%). CONCLUSION: It was concluded that it is feasible to create a diabetes register based on information in medical records in general practice. However, special attention should be paid to the validity of the diabetes diagnosis and its classification.
Authors: S Fourlanos; F Dotta; C J Greenbaum; J P Palmer; O Rolandsson; P G Colman; L C Harrison Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2005-09-29 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: R Turner; I Stratton; V Horton; S Manley; P Zimmet; I R Mackay; M Shattock; G F Bottazzo; R Holman Journal: Lancet Date: 1997-11-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Mette K Andersen; Maria Sterner; Tom Forsén; Annemari Käräjämäki; Olov Rolandsson; Carol Forsblom; Per-Henrik Groop; Kaj Lahti; Peter M Nilsson; Leif Groop; Tiinamaija Tuomi Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2014-06-07 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Anne Neumann; Margareta Norberg; Olaf Schoffer; Fredrik Norström; Ingegerd Johansson; Stefanie J Klug; Lars Lindholm Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-10-26 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Vanessa D de Mello; Jussi Paananen; Jaana Lindström; Maria A Lankinen; Lin Shi; Johanna Kuusisto; Jussi Pihlajamäki; Seppo Auriola; Marko Lehtonen; Olov Rolandsson; Ingvar A Bergdahl; Elise Nordin; Pirjo Ilanne-Parikka; Sirkka Keinänen-Kiukaanniemi; Rikard Landberg; Johan G Eriksson; Jaakko Tuomilehto; Kati Hanhineva; Matti Uusitupa Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-04-11 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Adina L Feldman; Simon J Griffin; Eva Fhärm; Margareta Norberg; Patrik Wennberg; Lars Weinehall; Olov Rolandsson Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: L P Hasvold; J Bodegård; M Thuresson; J Stålhammar; N Hammar; J Sundström; D Russell; S E Kjeldsen Journal: J Hum Hypertens Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 3.012
Authors: Carolina Donat-Vargas; Agneta Åkesson; Andreas Tornevi; Maria Wennberg; Johan Sommar; Hannu Kiviranta; Panu Rantakokko; Ingvar A Bergdahl Journal: Hypertension Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 10.190