CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study

Clinical research study

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 27, 2025
Entity authorityQ7887948 ↗
Source-derived summary

The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) was the largest clinical research study into diabetes ever conducted at the time. The study was conceived by Professor Robert Turner at Oxford University in 1976, conducted in the UK in 1977-1997, and published main results in 1998.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study” is clinical research study. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through United, Kingdom and Prospective, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1976, 1977, 1997, 1998—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, United, Kingdom and Prospective is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “clinical research study” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 27, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q7887948. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1976, 1977, 1997 and 1998.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study primary sources, United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study archive and United research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.