MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407868281 · doi:10.3329/jom.v26i1.79150

Knowledge and use of HbA1c among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus admitted in a tertiary hospital

2025· article· en· W4407868281 on OpenAlexaff
Ishrat Jabeen, Shanthi Prince, Mahbub Mayukh Rishad, Nawsabah Noor, Tazbiha Rahman Khan, Rashedul Hassan, Tanjina Hossain, Md Hafizur Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineType 2 Diabetes MellitusDiabetes mellitusTertiary careTertiary levelPediatricsInternal medicineFamily medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: HbA1c test provides an index of average blood glucose level during the past 2-3 months. It is now widely used in management of diabetes both as a measure of long-term glycemic and as a predictor of risk for diabetic complications. In recent years there has been an increased focus on encouraging patients to be aware of HbA1c. Hence, this study was designed to explore the level of knowledge and use of HbA1c test in type 2 diabetic patients in a tertiary hospital. Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted among 220 cases of type 2 diabetes mellitus admitted in the medicine ward of Dhaka Medical College and Hospital during the period of May 2024 to November 2024. Each individual was subjected to personal interview regarding demographic details and their level of knowledge of HbA1c by a semi-structured questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed using computer aided statistical software SSPS version 22. Chi2 test and Multivariable Logistic Regression were done to assess the relationship. Results: Among the participants, 59.1% were male and 40.9% were female. Majority (37.3%) were between 41-50 years age group, 26.8% completed higher secondary education and most (71.8%) lived in rural areas. Regarding knowledge of HbA1c test, majority of patients (63.6%) did not know about it. Moreover, only 21.4 % were aware of their target goal. Among aware patients, mean HbA1c was 8.1% whereas among unaware patients who did not know about the test, mean HbA1c was 9.2%. Higher education, urban residence, higher income, and the presence of diabetic complications were significantly associated with greater odds of HbA1c awareness. Patients with graduate-level education had the highest odds (OR = 5.80, 95% CI: 2.50–13.48, p < 0.001). Urban residents (OR = 3.10, 95% CI: 1.76–5.46, p < 0.001) and those with diabetic complications (OR = 2.20, 95% CI: 1.15–4.19, p = 0.017) were also more likely to be aware. Conversely, higher HbA1c levels were associated with lower odds of awareness (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.62–0.91, p = 0.003). Conclusion: Diabetes poses a global health challenge, especially in Bangladesh, where low awareness of HbA1c leads to poor control and complications. This study reveals that most patients lack HbA1c knowledge, resulting in higher levels and more complications. Education and routine testing are crucial to improving diabetes management and outcomes in resource-limited settings. The findings suggest targeted interventions should focus on improving awareness among rural, lower-income, and less-educated populations, as well as patients with poorer glycemic control. J MEDICINE 2025; 26: 20-27

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MedicineSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207