MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414809408 · doi:10.1007/s11892-025-01605-2

A Scoping Review on Community-based Diabetes Screening Interventions: Paving the Pathway to Early Care and Prevention of Diabetes

2025· review· en· W4414809408 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aimen Zehra, David Gerstle, Fatema M. Ali, Muhanad Ahmed Ali, Cília Mejía-Lancheros, Ghazal S. Fazli

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Diabetes Reports · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkAmgen (Canada)General Electric (Canada)Trillium Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionReferralType 2 diabetesSustainabilityHealth careDiabetes mellitusPrimary careMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review mapped evidence on community-based screening interventions for early detection of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes (T2D), and identified barriers and strategies for developing and implementing such interventions in community settings for diverse populations. RECENT FINDINGS: Using the Arskey & O'Malley and Levac frameworks, we conducted a scoping review that identified 33 studies across 13 countries that developed and tested a community-based T2D screening intervention, utilizing risk assessment and Point-of-Care (POC) glucose testing. Screenings occurred in settings such as pharmacies (21%), faith-based centers (6%), and mobile vans (6%), with most studies from the United States (42%), Australia (16%), and Canada (9%). Post-screening, 89% of interventions offered referrals to primary care, while few connected participants to community programming. Barriers and strategies were mapped to the socioecological model to guide future development and implementation of early detection interventions in community settings. This review identified key factors for successful community-based T2D screening interventions, including adequate resources (i.e., funding and personnel), community engagement efforts, and accessible, feasible screening of T2D in community settings. POC testing proved valuable for early detection through immediate glucose results that would prompt potential interventions. However, challenges remain in ensuring long-term sustainability and feasibility of such approaches, as many interventions encountered high attrition rates due to challenges with referral pathways to health care and community programs, structural inequities, and lack of sustainable follow-up processes. Future research should focus on evaluating the cost-effectiveness and sustainable integration of these community-based T2D screening approaches into health systems for broader impact.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.078
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.078
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.007
Bibliometrics0.0160.019
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Diabetes ReportsSame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207