Introduction: The 2021 IDF-DAR risk calculator had been previously evaluated in multiple studies and subsequently widely accepted and applied in clinical practice as a practical standardized tool for patient risk stratification. Recently updated, the 2026 IDF-DAR Risk calculator enables a more individualized, evidence-related evaluation of patientrelated and disease-related risk factors, incorporating modern diabetes technologies, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), automated insulin delivery (AID) systems, and advanced insulin formulations to enhance risk stratification. This tool allows medical professionals to tailor Ramadan practices based on overall factors toward promoting safe fasting. Methodology: This prospective multicentre observational study recruited adults with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes attending public hospitals nationwide. People with diabetes (PwD) intending to perform Ramadan fasting were invited to participate and assessed using the 2026 IDF-DAR Risk Calculator in the 6-week pre-Ramadan period between 30th January and 19th March 2026. Results: A total of 458 PwD were evaluated and stratified into low (15.7%), moderate (41%), and high risk (43.3%) categories. Most participants had Type 2 diabetes (83.6%), with 60.3% having a disease duration exceeding 10 years and 43% exhibiting poor glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c >9%). Insulin therapy was used by 76.4% of participants, including two individuals with Type 1 diabetes using AID systems. Most participants reported no recent hypoglycemia (76.4%), 81.0% performed glucose monitoring, and 3.3% used CGM. Severe comorbidities were uncommon, with 1.1% having unstable macrovascular disease and 4.4% advanced chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <30). Notably, 72.2% received structured Ramadan education. Conclusion Majority of PwD attending tertiary diabetes clinics were in the moderate- to high-risk category and intended to fast despite medical advice against fasting in some cases. Although most participants were on insulin therapy, hypoglycemia was low in the pre-Ramadan period. Integration of modern technologies, advanced insulin therapies, and structured education may support safer fasting practices.
Risk Assessment ; Diabetes Mellitus ; Hospitals ; Fasting

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the severity of COVID-19, inflammatory parameters and clinical outcomes among patients with normal and subnormal levels of Vitamin D. Methodology: This is a retrospective cohort study of 135 patients admitted in a tertiary hospital for COVID-19. Patients were grouped according to their Vitamin D level. Primary outcome measure was the composite of all-cause mortality and morbidity. Other outcome measures determined were the comparison among the groups on the severity of COVID-19 infection, changes in inflammatory parameters, length of hospital stay and duration of respiratory support. Results: There was a significant trend of higher ICU admission, mortality (p-value= 0.006) and poor clinical outcome (p-value=0.009) among the Vitamin D deficient group. No significant difference was found for most of the inflammatory parameters, duration of hospital stay and respiratory support. Overall, patients with deficient, but not insufficient Vitamin D level had 6 times higher odds of composite poor outcome than those with normal Vitamin D (crude OR=5.18, p-value= 0.003; adjusted OR =6.3, p-value=0.043). Conclusion The inverse relationship between Vitamin D level and poor composite outcome observed in our study suggests that low Vitamin D may be a risk factor for poor prognosis among patients admitted for COVID-19.
type 2 diabetes mellitus ; Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver disease