|Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Prediabetes.
|WikiProject Medicine||(Rated B-class, Mid-importance)|
Recent Task Force recommendations
The proper term should be Pre-diabetes. Both WHO and ADA use the spelling Pre-diabetes
Parts of this article need editing for grammar and sentence structure; e.g. 'Smoker can plan to quit' and 'Stress causes hormonal imbalance and prevents insulin to work normally and end up with a diabetes. So take the stress seriously and try to be calm or practice meditation'.126.96.36.199 (talk) 03:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Merge with Pre-Diabetes
Agree A merge of the two articles and a redirect are in order. It doesn't much matter which article contains the redirect and which contains the content, as both routes will get a user to the right place. The article can note the generally-accepted spelling, and any variants. --SV Resolution(Talk) 16:53, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Since Pre-diabetes didn't cite any sources, I simply redirected it here. Its history is still available at  in case anyone wants to scavenge useful info from there and add it here - but with sources please! —Angr 15:23, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
EDITING OUT LOW-CARB DIET
Hi, I'm an MD with prediabetes/borderline diabetes. For over a year I was able to reduce and stabilize my sugar levels at the low prediabetes levels with a simple lowering carbs in my diet. There are lots of peer-reviewed papers documenting that in the literature. When I came across this wiki page I noticed lack of info on low-carb diet. Interestingly, minutes after I wrote a couple of sentences, the info was deleted by user Piano non troppo who stated that "external links you added to the page Prediabetes do not comply with our guidelines for external links". I reviewed the guidelines, and there was no problem with my link. I feel that there is some sort censorship going on with this page. This reminds me the Wiki fiasco with naked short editing. Nevertheless, I feel that the information on low-carb approach is too vital for too many people with DM or prediabetes, to play some ego games on this page. So, the question is should the low-card info be suppressed here, even though ADA just sanctioned that too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 05:29, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
- Please do write about the low-carb diets you favor, and present authoritative primary references from peer-reviewed sources to support the statement that these diets have been clinically proven to be more efficacious than the SAD or ADA diets. You already know how to find these articles through a pubmed search. Some may be free to read online, some may be in medical journals you may already subscribe to, and you may have to visit a university library to read some. You can leave it to other writers to supply information about other types of diets (South Beach or Neal Barnard's diet, for example), that have also been shown to be efficacious. Remember to use primary sources, like peer-reviewed papers wherever possible. Summaries at medscape make good "external reference" links for readers who don't have access to the original papers.
- Be bold. Cite primary sources. Make a great article. --SV Resolution(Talk) 21:51, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Definition of Impaired fasting glycaemia
In the last paragraph under Classification ==> Impaired fasting glycaemia, the text describes upper limits of 110 and 100 mg/dL under two criteria while the detail below lists these values as lower limits. This inconsistency is repeated in the Wikipedia article Impaired fasting glycaemia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 19:36, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Definition of prediabetes?
Is there a generally accepted medical definition of prediabetes? The Diagnosis section identifies three blood tests each with a range of readings, then states "Levels above these limits would be a diagnosis for diabetes." Above all of these levels or above any one?
Additionally, it might be useful to explain the connection between the two sets of symptoms in the Classification section and the definition of prediabetes. Currently it's not clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 20:23, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Signs and Symptoms section - weight gain?
I'm learning about prediabetes, so checked out WP as one stream of information. I notice that under the signs and symptoms heading, weight gain is given. The Mayo Clinic page given in the reference says that one should be screened for prediabetes if one has PCOS, and a symptom of that is weight gain. Therefore, I think it's misleading to suggest that weight gain is a symptom of prediabetes. Diabetes.org.uk says that weight loss is a symptom of diabetes, but I haven't yet found a reference to weight gain or loss for prediabetes.
Would someone please confirm whether weight gain is a symptom of prediabetes (without also having PCOS)? I don't want to edit the page until someone with more knowledge and accurate citations has a look. Thanks MarpoHarks (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Signs and symptoms, blood pressure
- No, they are not the same thing. Hypertension and high blood pressure is the same thing, but you can have elevated blood pressure but not have hypertension. --Frmorrison (talk) 14:35, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
There is a singificant viewpoint that pre-diabetes is a meaningless condition created by pharmaceutical companies, among others, to promote treatment with their drugs. I would think that this viewpoint should be included in the article. For example:
Analysis Too Much Medicine
The epidemic of pre-diabetes: the medicine and the politics
BMJ 2014; 349 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g4485 (Published 15 July 2014) Cite this as: BMJ 2014;349:g4485
John S Yudkin, Victor M Montori
Diagnostic change—The definition of people at risk has expanded from impaired glucose tolerance to include people with raised fasting glucose or glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentrations and cut-off points have been lowered
Rationale for change—People in all the above categories have a raised diabetes risk, although prediction is poorer for fasting glucose and HbA1c than for impaired glucose tolerance
Leap of faith—Treatment of people in newly defined categories will improve mortality and morbidity
Limitations of evidence—No studies have examined the effect of lifestyle or drug interventions in newly added subcategories