Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22218698›Full record

ArticleDiabetologia2012

The development and validation of a clinical prediction model to determine the probability of MODY in patients with young-onset diabetes.

B M Shields, T J McDonald, S Ellard, M J Campbell, C Hyde, A T Hattersley

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetologia, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 160 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
160citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02082132 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2013, after this paper: background citation

A Cross-sectional Study of Young-onset Diabetes in Two UK Ethnic Groups.

TypeobservationalSponsorImperial College LondonRan2013 to 2021Enrolled916ConditionsDiabetes, Maturity Onset Diabetes of the Young, Type 1 Diabetes, Type 2 Diabetes
NCT02287506 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

The StartRIGHT Pilot Study; Getting the Right Classification and Treatment From Diagnosis in Adults With Diabetes

TypeinterventionalSponsorRoyal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation TrustRan2015 to 2016Enrolled34ConditionsDiabetesArmsOptimised Diagnostic Strategy
NCT05586594 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Identifying Maturity-onset Diabetes of the Young in Susceptible Emirati Patients Who Are Currently Treated as Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

TypeinterventionalSponsorUnited Arab Emirates UniversityRan2024 to 2026Enrolled150ConditionsMaturity-onset Diabetes of the Young, Monogenic Diabetes, MODYArmsGenetic testing for 4 MODY genes (GCK, HNF1A, HNF4A, HNF1B)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

160 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 325 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

100 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

B M ShieldsPeninsula NIHR Clinical Research Facility, Peninsula Medical School, University of Exeter, Barrack Road, Exeter EX2 5DW, UK.
T J McDonald
S Ellard
M J Campbell
C Hyde
A T Hattersley
Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry · GBRoyal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aims/hypothesisDiagnosing MODY is difficult. To date, selection for molecular genetic testing for MODY has used discrete cut-offs of limited clinical characteristics with varying sensitivity and specificity. We aimed to use multiple, weighted, clinical criteria to determine an individual's probability of having MODY, as a crucial tool for rational genetic testing.

methodsWe developed prediction models using logistic regression on data from 1,191 patients with MODY (n = 594), type 1 diabetes (n = 278) and type 2 diabetes (n = 319). Model performance was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, cross-validation and validation in a further 350 patients.

resultsThe models defined an overall probability of MODY using a weighted combination of the most discriminative characteristics. For MODY, compared with type 1 diabetes, these were: lower HbA(1c), parent with diabetes, female sex and older age at diagnosis. MODY was discriminated from type 2 diabetes by: lower BMI, younger age at diagnosis, female sex, lower HbA(1c), parent with diabetes, and not being treated with oral hypoglycaemic agents or insulin. Both models showed excellent discrimination (c-statistic = 0.95 and 0.98, respectively), low rates of cross-validated misclassification (9.2% and 5.3%), and good performance on the external test dataset (c-statistic = 0.95 and 0.94). Using the optimal cut-offs, the probability models improved the sensitivity (91% vs 72%) and specificity (94% vs 91%) for identifying MODY compared with standard criteria of diagnosis <25 years and an affected parent. The models are now available online at www.diabetesgenes.org . CONCLUSIONS/

interpretationWe have developed clinical prediction models that calculate an individual's probability of having MODY. This allows an improved and more rational approach to determine who should have molecular genetic testing.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAdolescentAdultAge of OnsetBody Mass IndexChildDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemic AgentsIncidenceInsulinLogistic ModelsMaleGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin

Identifiers

PMID22218698
PMCPMC3328676
OpenAlexW2133857188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.