Systemic review

Measure of the Rate at which Mortality in
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Occurs: Protocol for a
Systematic Review
Corresponding Author:
Dr Chukwuemeka Nwaneri, Department of Community Health & Wellbeing, Faculty of Health & Social Care, University of Chester, CH1 1SL, UK.
E-mail: nwaneric@tcd.ie. c.nwaneri@chester.ac.uk Systematic Review
Nwaneri C1,2, Cooper H1,3, Jones DB2, Agwu-Umahi O1, Osho T4
¹Department of Community Health & Wellbeing, Faculty of Health & Social Care, University of Chester, CH1 1SL, UK, ²Department of
Medicine, Centre for Diabetes & Endocrinology, Wirral University Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Arrowe Park Hospital, Upton
CH49 5PE, UK, ³Research and Development, Alder Hey Children’s NHS Foundation Trust, Eaton Road, Liverpool L12 2AP, UK, 4Department
of Clinical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Chester, CH1 4BJ, UK
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Type 2 diabetes is the third largest cause of mortality in the United Kingdom, with about 50% of patients’ having
developed complications at time of diagnosis. We consider that the evidence which explores the actual hazard ratios of mortality has
not been consistent. n this paper we discuss methodology and review the most recent accurate data on mortality in type 2 diabetes.
Methods: A systematic review will be undertaken aimed at synthesis of evidence of relative risk of mortality in type 2 diabetes, using
the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidelines. We will explore conflicting and unanswered questions in relation to mortality.
The primary outcome is all-cause, overall-cause or total mortality expressed as hazard ratios. Sub-groups will also be explored; age,
gender, socio-economic factors and causes of death. We will review abstracts published after 1990 in the English language. Our data
source will include electronic databases; the Cochrane library, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Medline/PubMed, and
other grey literature. The study populations are type 2 diabetes patients whose mortality outcome, expressed as hazard ratio, has
been evaluated. Data extraction will be undertaken by one reviewer and triangulated by the second and third reviewer. The quality
of the included studies will be evaluated in accordance with the inclusion/exclusion criteria; methodological quality that meets the
critical appraisal framework and the relevance to the research questions. Evidence from data will be synthesised through a descriptive
epidemiological review from included studies; meta-analysis will be used if appropriate. Result & Conclusion: We expect to pool
homogenous studies of large population cohorts which explore the hazard ratio of mortality, and to summarise the evidence of the
actual mortality risk in type 2 diabetes, with limited bias. This will help direct future research in areas of unanswered questions and
may influence healthcare policy decisions.
Keywords: All-cause mortality, Hazard ratio, Meta-analysis, Systematic review, Type 2 diabetes mellitus
cerebrovascular diseases and cancer but diabetes is not
always noted. Diabetes is a poor prognostic predictor
in patients with cancer, heart failure, acute myocardial
infarction, and other medical conditions. Nevertheless,
the prognosis for diabetes patients varies greatly.
It has been recognised for many years that T2D is
associated with an increase in mortality rate, in the range
of between four to five times of those in the general
mortality statistics.6 More recent studies have suggested
that it is twice that seen in the non-diabetic population.7
Even though it is known that diabetes reduces life
expectancy by 10-12 years this does not translate to an
ability to predict death in patients with T2D.
More recently in Europe and UK an increased incidence
of certain carcinomas have been implicated in diabetes-related
mortality,8,9 although not seen in the study from
UK Health Information Network.10 Carcinomas of the
liver, pancreas and endometrium were associated with
INTRODUCTION
Globally, the 2010 projection is that about 285 million
people suffer from type 1 or type 2 diabetes (T2D)1; in
the United Kingdom (UK), the estimate is of 3 million
diagnosed,2 with undiagnosed diabetes accounting for
an additional 1 million individuals.3 At least 180 million
of these patients have T2D.4 As the life expectancy in
the general population in UK is increasing there is
limited evidence for a corresponding increase in the
diabetic population. Accurate mortality indices of T2D
are essential since countries rely on these for resource
allocation and health systems prioritization.
The reported low mortality indices of T2D seen in the
UK population have been questioned by many, as it is
known that inaccuracy in the recorded cause of death on
death certificates is widespread.5 This is because diabetes
has been implicated in the mechanisms leading to death
in many medical conditions including cardiovascular,
| Jul - Dec 2014 | Vol 1 | Issue 2 | Acta Medica International 110

Nwaneri, et al.: Mortality in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
more than a two fold increase in relative risks, whereas
colo-rectal, breast and bladder cancers were associated
with less than 1.5 fold increase in relative risk.11,12 There
was no association with lung cancer while the study was
inconclusive for renal and non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas.
Unexplainably, prostatic carcinoma was less often associated
with T2D.11 It is widely believed that this association is
partly due to increasing incidence of both diseases with
increasing age and their complex and multi-factorial
pathophysiologies.
Other studies have suggested a possible increased
malignancy risk with insulin therapy or its secretagogues
in T2D while other authors provide contradictory
evidences.10,13,14 Sulfonylureas are the most implicated
secretagogues amongst oral diabetes medications with
possible increased malignancy risk,10 whereas metformin
has been seen to be associated with reduced cancer rates
and mortality in patients with T2D.15
In 1998 the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study
(UKPDS) study identified that sulfonylurea therapy was
not associated with increased risk of death, although a more
recently published Canadian study identified a possible
dose response relationship between sulfonylureas and
mortality in T2D.16 In addition, metformin monotherapy
although associated with improved glycaemic control and
reduction of all-cause mortality especially in obese T2D, its
early addition to sulfonylurea therapy resulted in increased
diabetes-related mortality when compared to sulfonylurea
alone.17 There is also additional limited evidence that some
therapeutic agents, e.g. long-acting sulfonylureas, some
thiazolelinediones and insulin are also associated with
increased mortality rates in T2D.10,14 Thiazolidinediones,
especially rosiglitazone have been implicated in their
effects on heart failure, myocardial infarction and cardiac
mortality.18
Barnett et al. from their study in Tayside in UK showed that
the age at diagnosis and duration of diabetes in patients
with T2D affect both relative and absolute mortality risks
and all-cause mortality.19 Diabetes-related morbidity and
mortality is age-related, it tends to be less in patients
who develop T2D in their late seventies when compared
to those who develop T2D in their mid-forties.12 The risk
of silent myocardial infarction (autonomic neuropathy)
and hypoglycaemic unawareness increases with diabetes
duration, obesity and hyperglycaemia. In one study in New
Zealand it was concluded that in patients who had had
myocardial infarction and/or congestive heart failure, the
relative risk of death remains high for at least four years after
hospitalisation regardless of glycaemic and cardiovascular
risk factor regulation.20
Gender has been an independent factor in the mortality
risks in T2D. Researchers have noted that in people above
49 years of age, females have greater mortality rates than
males. This could be due to the risk of death from coronary
heart disease (following the loss of cardioprotective effects
of circulating oestrogen).21
There is also excess mortality associated with social
deprivation in T2D.22 This was stressed by other researchers
who noted that diabetes mortality seen in those with poor
social deprivation status was twice as high as the national
average of those in the wealthiest areas.23
Various studies have proposed differing pathophysiological
mechanisms in the acute effects of diabetes itself and to the
accumulating adverse risks of mortality. The important
mechanism implicated in the increase in mortality rate
seen in T2D results from vascular and circulatory changes
leading to endothelial dysfunction, platelet adhesions,
viscosity and increased thrombosis.24 More recently insulin
and insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) receptor dynamics
and in their expression of insulin-mediated abnormal
cell proliferation have been established.25 Although other
explanatory biological pathways do exist, as documented in
the literature on the pathogenesis of carcinomas in T2D there
still remains unclear answers especially regarding the role of
insulin resistance, hyperinsulinaemia and hyperglycaemia
in the aetiology of cancers in T2D, as cancer and diabetes
share similar risk factors.
With the ushering in of newer oral hypoglycaemic drugs
it was expected that glycaemic regulation and mortality
indices would start to normalise. The UKPDS reported
that tight glycaemic control should be aimed at, with
HbA1c of less than 7% but a more recent meta-analysis
whilst showing that tight glycaemic control reduced
microvascular complication,17 and the risk for some
cardiovascular disease events such as nonfatal myocardial
infarction, it did not decrease the risks of cardiovascular
endpoint or all-cause mortality. It also increased the risk of
severe hypoglycaemia which is associated with morbidity
and mortality.26
It is also surprising that even with improved patient
education, specialist care, multi-disciplinary team working,
technological advances and newer medications which
have removed some obstacles, the attainment of improved
life expectancy and decreasing mortality remains elusive.
This raises questions pertaining to whether this is due to
the complex interplay of some other variables, or lack of
knowledge of the actual figures.
As the Diabetes UK and its research Network continues to
explore avenues to unveil areas of unanswered research
111 Acta Medica International | Jul - Dec 2014 | Vol 1 | Issue 2 |

questions with regards to improving life expectancy and
reducing mortality from T2D, several questions need to be
answered: these include;
At what stage should T2D patients commence cholesterol
lowering agents?
Should calcium-channel blockers be commenced earlier in
patients without overt nephrological complications?
In T2D, macrovascular complication is the predominant
cause of mortality. As a consequence, preventable and
modifiable risk factors such as cardiovascular risks should
be aggressively reduced. Modifiable factors are considered
to be important in about 70% of cases of mortality. Tight
glycaemic regulation has been shown to be difficult to
maintain and the evidence shows that in itself it has little
effect on morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular
disease in T2D. However there are also reports of adverse
mortality associations in some patients where glycaemia is
reduced after long duration of diabetes., Efforts should be
aimed at continual optimisation of treatments for the four
atherogenic factors in cardiovascular diseases: hypertension
(anti-hypertensives), cholesterol and hyperlipidaemia
(cholesterol lowering agents), obesity (weight reduction
and diet modification), and smoking (smoking cessation),
as well as hyperglycaemia.
Previous systematic reviews have shown varying increased
relative mortality in type 2 diabetes combining different
proxies of measure of degree of mortality, such as relative
risks, standardised mortality ratios, and hazard ratios.
These pose uncertainties in the true effect size. Furthermore,
they were published prior to the changes in the clinical
diagnostic criteria made by the WHO and American
Diabetes Association in 1999. This study will update
previous reviews and assess the actual relative mortality
using the measure of degree of mortality.
In summary, this systematic review will explore the
conflicting and unanswered questions in studies involving
mortality risk and mortality predictors in T2D in relation to;
actual causes of death and risk factors. Sub-groups within
the Type 2 population will also be explored in relation to
age, gender and socio-economic factors.
The systematic review will aim to answer these questions
using the following methodology.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature will be undertaken
using published and unpublished articles including grey
literature. The review will follow the Centre for Reviews
and Dissemination (CRD) (March 2001) report number 4
guidance on methodological quality scoring criteria27 and
adhere to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic
Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement on
reporting quality.28
Ethics approval was approved from the University of
Chester Ethics Committee and from the Integrated Research
Application System, UK.
Data Source
Electronic database search will be conducted including; The
Cochrane Library, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination
(CRD; DARE-database of abstracts of reviews of effects,
HTA-health technology assessments, and NHS EED
databases), Ovid Medline/PubMed, CINAHL, Web of
Science (Web of Knowledge), World Health Organisation
Library and Information Network for knowledge database
(WHOLIS), The Centre for Evidenced-Based Medicine,
PsycInfo, Google Scholar, EMBASE, National Library for
Health, Ongoing Reviews database, British Nursing Index
and SCOPUS. Others would include UK National Research
Register (NRR), ReFeR, Kings Fund and Conference Papers
Index. Also grey literature search will be conducted for
unpublished articles using FADE, Proquest Dissertation and
Theses, and other Indexed Citations up to 2014.
References of all retrieved articles will be checked for
relevant studies, and if needed experts will be contacted
for advice, and to identify additional published and
unpublished references. The process of conducting the
search will be documented as it develops to ensure
transparency.
Search Terms
Keywords and phrases, including Medical Subject Headings
(MeSH) to be searched will include; ‘‘Type 2 diabetes
mellitus mortality’’, “Type 2 diabetes mortality”, ‘‘mortality
and type 2 diabetes’’, ‘‘excess mortality and type 2 diabetes’’,
‘‘mortality rates and type 2 diabetes’’, ‘‘mortality and
diabetes’’, “type II diabetes and mortality”, “type 2 DM and
mortality”, “type II DM and mortality”, “determinants of
mortality and type 2 diabetes”, ‘‘mortality predictors and
diabetes’’, and an effective combination of search terms
will be conducted. The details of the search strategies are
shown in Table 1.
Study Selection and Eligibility Criteria
Studies will be included if they fulfil the following criteria:
Study design: Existing systematic reviews, epidemiological
studies and RCTs of intervention for treating T2D
Participants: People with T2D

Table 1: The search strategy to be used in the systematic review
Search strategy Combination of free text words and controlled terms (MeSH)
Search #1
Search #2
Type 2 diabetes mellitus mortality, Type 2 diabetes mortality, mortality and type 2 diabetes, excess
mortality and type 2 diabetes, mortality rates and type 2 diabetes, mortality and diabetes, type II
diabetes and mortality, type 2 DM and mortality, type II DM and mortality, determinants of mortality
and type 2 diabetes, mortality predictors and diabetes, type 2 diabetes survival, type 2 diabetes death
Diabet* OR type 2 diabet* OR T2DM OR NIDDM OR type II diabet* NOT (type 1 diabet* OR type 1
DM OR type I DM OR IDDM)
Search #3 Mortality OR mortalit* OR mortality indices OR mortality predictors OR survival OR survival* OR death
OR death* OR Type 2/*complications/mortality
Search #4
Search #1 AND #2
AND #3 AND #4
Diabetes/*adverse outcome/mortality OR diabetes/*outcome/death OR diabetes/*outcome/mortality
OR diabetes/*complications/mortality
Limit: English language
Types of outcome: All-cause-, cause-specific mortality in
T2D expressed as hazard ratio, or if it is possible to calculate
from the data available.
Studies will only be included if they report sufficient detail
and constitutes a partial or complete review of mortality in
T2D, and the search will be streamlined to research in the
English language from 1990 through 2014. Search restriction
was limited to studies published after 1990, as previous
systematic reviews on mortality in T2D have produced
conflicting and inconsistent evidence, and were published
prior to the changes in the clinical diagnostic criteria by
the World Health Organisation, and American Diabetes
Association in 1999.
The following exclusion criteria will be used in this study:
studies not published in English language and only
available as an abstract; poor quality studies as decided
by quality appraisal; and articles published prior to 1990.
Titles and abstracts of articles will be checked by two
reviewers (CN and HC). Full texts of selected studies
will be assessed for inclusion by one reviewer (CN) and
triangulated by the other reviewer (HC and DBJ). Any
variations in comments will be resolved by discussion.
Figure 1 demonstrates the PRISMA flow chart for the
selection of the studies.28
Data Extraction
Data extraction will be undertaken by one reviewer (CN,
OAU, TO) and triangulated by the second reviewer,
(HC) and if possible a third, (DBJ) especially if there
are areas of conflicting comments. In the study we will
utilise a standard paper format for easy extraction of
data from the selected studies. Data from individually
selected studies will be extracted as follows: author,
year of publication, study design, setting/location, year
of study, comparison population, study size, number
of deaths, patients’ characteristics, follow-up years,
outcome measure of mortality, and degree of mortality
in hazard ratios.
$EVWUDFWVLGHQWLILHGWKURXJK
GDWDEDVHVHDUFKLQJ
,QFOXGHG (OLJLELOLW 6FUHHQLQJ ,GHQWLILFDWLRQ
$GGLWLRQDODEVWUDFWVLGHQWLILHG
WKURXJKRWKHUVRXUFHV
$EVWUDFWVDIWHUGXSOLFDWHVUHPRYHG
$EVWUDFWV VFUHHQHG $EVWUDFWVH[FOXGHG
)XOOWH[WDUWLFOHVDVVHVVHGIRU
HOLJLELOLW
)XOOWH[WDUWLFOHVH[FOXGHG
ZLWKUHDVRQV
6WXGLHVLQFOXGHGLQIRUIXOOWH[WVHDUFK
6WXGLHVLQFOXGHGLTQX DQWLWDWLYHVQWKHVLV
PHWD DQDOVLV

Figure 1: Flow diagram of study selection procedure [28]
The quality of the included studies will be evaluated
in accordance with, the inclusion/exclusion criteria;
methodological quality that meets the critical appraisal
framework; and relevance to the research questions. The
criteria used in the assessment of quality of included studies
will be documented and clearly stated, and scored.
Quality Appraisal
The methodological quality of included studies will be
assessed using CRD’s guidance check list (critical quality
appraisal programme, CASP) for quantitative research:
systematic reviews, case control and cohort studies.27 With
little variations in the CASP’s tool for various types of study,
there are still 3 broad areas common to all; validity, results
and relevance of results locally. The CASP tools for case
control, systematic review and cohort studies comprise
of 11-item, 10-item, and 12-item questions respectively as
shown in Table 2.29 We defined the quality of methodology
as low, medium and high using the parameters from CASP

Table 2: A 12‑item questionnaire to assess the
methodological quality of systematic review29
SECTION A: Screening questions (Are the results of the study valid?)
Did the study address a clearly a clearly focused issue?
□ Yes □ No □ Unclear
Did the authors use an appropriate method to answer their
questions?
If ‘Yes’ in both questions 1 2, then it is worth proceeding with
the remaining questions
Was the cohort or cases recruited in an acceptable way?
Was the exposure accurately measured to minimise bias?
Was the outcome accurately measured to minimise bias?
A) Have the authors identified all important confounding
factors? (B) Have they taken account of the confounding factors in
the design and/or analysis?
A) Was the follow‑up of subjects complete enough? (B).Was the
follow‑up of subjects long enough?
SECTION B: What are the results?
What are the results of the study?
A) How precise are the results? B) How precise is the estimate of
the risk?
Do you believe the results?
SECTION C: Will the results help me locally?
Was the follow‑up of subjects complete enough?
Do the results of this study fit with other available evidence?
tool to categorise the papers based on their measurement
properties. The CASP tool contains 12-item questions that
assess reliability, content-, criterion-, and construct validity,
measurement error, responsiveness and generalizability
of the results. Each of these measurement properties were
evaluated separately and scored for each study. An item
was scored ‘high’ if the relevant aspect of methodological
quality was presented clearly and adequately. Whereas
a score of ‘medium’ indicated that there was evidence of
adequacy of the methodological quality but not overtly
stated. An item scored ‘poor’, if there was doubt or lack of
clarity in the adequacy of the methodological quality and/
or flaws in the design or statistical analysis. For uniformity
and transparency PRISMA checklist tools will be used to
assess the quality of reporting. Three reviewers will do
this independently based on the availability of the data in
the articles. The quality assessment and risk of bias will
further be carried out using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.30
Funnel plots will be explored for assessment of publication
and related biases (language bias, poor methodological
quality, and clinical heterogeneity), therefore the external
validity of the data analysis.
Synthesis of Evidence
Evidence from data on mortality in T2D will be
synthesised through a descriptive epidemiological review
from included studies; meta-analysis will be used if
appropriate as we expect the studies to be heterogenous
in nature judging from the wide variations of population,
and variability in complications and co-morbidities of the
population. Data synthesis comprising of an overview
of the included studies with respect to characteristics of
the populations, interventions, designs and outcomes
will be narrated. Data from included studies will be
summarised in a table to maintain evidence. The point
of estimate derived from each of the study design will
then be taken for data synthesis. In addition, the quality
of design and their effects will be included. In the data
synthesis, hazard ratios were appropriate as measures
of risks, and were illustrated using tables, figures and
other computations. This will highlight the possible
comparisons to be analysed, and the outcomes to be
used in the meta-analysis, if appropriate. The summary
evidence will be tabulated to help in ascertain and enhance
transparency and precision.
Meta-analysis will be carried out to show precise estimate
of mortality risk. Adjustments for confounding factors and
sub-analyses of the effects of gender, drugs, cardiovascular
diseases, smoking and alcohol, age at diagnosis and cancer
on mortality risks will be also assessed. We will then
narrate the results of the systematic review in line with
the outcome of the meta-analysis. Tables of the selected
studies will be shown as well as the figures of the meta-analysis.
In addition it will show precision and statistical
significance, measured by p-values. The point estimate,
lower and upper limits of 95% confidence intervals will
be log scaled and the effects observed in the studies will
be pooled to produce a weighted average effect of all the
studies. If there is a large effect size, meta-analysis may
not be appropriate as nothing new would be added to
inference. During the meta-analysis in order to check
for the robustness of summary effect, larger studies are
weighted preferentially by fixed effect models, whereas
smaller studies are weighted preferentially by random
effect models.32 This therefore produces wider confidence
intervals around the summary effect as they take into
account variability in studies. However, the most precise
tests of heterogeneity, the Cochran’s Q score (Q-statistics),
Inconsistency Index (I2), Tau-square estimate (t2), will be
used and with a p-value 0.1 indicating a statistically
significant difference between studies. A high value of I2

and Q-statistics translates to high heterogeneity. The Chi-square,
a statistical test that defines the degree of freedom
and goodness to fit within a distribution of independent
variables, can also aid in the interpretations. An attempt
will be made to explain the possible reasons for the
heterogeneity.
Subgroup Analysis
Further exploration of heterogeneity results will be carried
out using subgroup analysis.31 Subgroup analysis will also
be explored with respect to age, gender, socioeconomic
status and cause of death, if adequate data are obtained
from the selected studies. We will separately synthesise
the results of subgroup of studies with different designs to
ascertain if differences exist in the summary effect.
Sensitivity analysis will be used to ascertain the effects
of different assumptions on the results i.e. repetition of
analysis using the best and worst outcomes for the missing
observations in each subgroup studied to ascertain the
degree to which they affect the summary effect. Reviewers
independently will triangulate the narrative write up by
the lead reviewer with comments.
DISCUSSION
The results are expected to show the degree of mortality
risks in T2D when compared with the general population.
The strengths and limitations of the included studies will
also be presented. The outcome of this study will help policy
makers and healthcare managers direct resources for quality
care in patients with diabetes.
EDITOR’S COMMENT
Upon completion, the result will be disseminated both
locally and internationally through peer-reviewed journal.
AUTHOR’S CONTRIBUTION
OAU, TO, CN, HC and DBJ are principal investigators for
the systematic review. CN and HC proposed the study.
DBJ and HC are reviewers and supervisors of the study.
All authors read and approved the final manuscript. We
intend to re-evaluate and update the review after 2 years.
LISTS OF ABBREVIATIONS
• T2D: Type 2 Diabetes
• UK: United Kingdom
• UKPDS: United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study
• HbA1C: Glycated haemoglobin
• CRD: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination
• DARE: Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects
• HTA: Health Technology Assessment
• PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic
Reviews and Meta-Analyses
• CASP: Critical Quality Appraisal Programme
• DPP-4 inhibitors: Dipeptidyl peptidase 4-inhibitors
COMPETING OF INTEREST
OAU is a postgraduate student at the University of Chester.
TO is researcher at the Clinical Sciences and Nutrition
department of the University of Chester. CNwas doctoral
student under the auspices of Gladstone Fellowship,
University of Chester and The Wirral University Teaching
Hospital Foundation Trust, and presently a visiting Senior
Lecturer in the Faculty of Health Social Care. No financial
and non-financial competing interest.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We sincerely wish to acknowledge the assistance from the
University of Chester and the Mc Ardle Librarians for their
devoted and unreserved facilitation of the search process
and retrieval of the studies. We also thank Prof Rod Owen
for his critical appraisal of the initial drafts and concepts.
REFERENCES
1. Diabetes UK.Diabetes in the UK 2010: Key statistics on diabetes.
Available from http://www.diabetes.org.uk/Documents/Reports/
Diabetes_in_the_UK_2010.pdf (accessed: 04.11.2010).
2. Roglic G, Unwin N, Bennett PH, Mathers C, Tuomilehto J, Nag
S, Connolly V, King H: The burden of mortality attributable to
diabetes: realistic estimates for the year 2000. Diabetes Care, 2005;
28(9):2130-35.
3. Rayner M, Peterson S, Buckley C, Press V: Coronary heart disease
Statistics: Diabetes Supplements. British Heart Foundation Health
Promotion research Group.2001
4. World Health Organization. Diabetes. World Health Organisation.
2010. Available from www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs312/
en/index.html. (accessed 28.10.2010).
5. Stamler J, Vaccaro O, Neaton JD, Wentworth D: Diabetes, other risk
factors and 12 year cardiovascular mortality from men screened in
the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. Diabetes Care, 1993;
16: 434-444.
6. Fuller JH, Elford J, Goldblatt P, Adelstein AM: Diabetes Mortality:
New light on an underestimated public health problem.
Diabetologia,1983; 24: 336-341.
7. Guzder RN, Gatling W, Mullerr MA, Byrne CD: Early mortality
from the time of diagnosis of type 2 diabetes: a 5 year prospective
cohort study with a local age- and sex-matched comparison.
Diabetic Medicine, 2007; 24(10):1164-1167.
8. Hemkens LG, Grouven U, Bender R, Günster C, Gutschmidt
S, Selke GW, Sawicki PT: Risk of malignancies in patients with
diabetes treated with human insulin or insulin analogues: a cohort
study. Diabetologia, 2009; 52(9):1732-1744.
9. Jonasson JM, Ljung R, Talbäck M, Haglund B, Gudbjörnsdòttir
S, Steineck G: Insulin glargine use and short-term incidence of
malignancies-a population-based follow-up study in Sweden.
Diabetologia, 2009; 52(9):1745-1754.

Systemic review

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Systemic review (20)

More from Sanjeev kumar Jain (20)

Systemic review