Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29284543›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2017

External validation of type 2 diabetes computer simulation models: definitions, approaches, implications and room for improvement-a protocol for a systematic review.

Katherine Ogurtsova, Thomas L Heise, Ute Linnenkamp, Charalabos-Markos Dintsios, Stefan K Lhachimi, Andrea Icks

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katherine OgurtsovaInstitute for Health Services Research and Health Economics, German Diabetes Center (DDZ), Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at Heinrich Heine University, Auf'm Hennekamp 65, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany. Katherine.Ogurtsova@ddz.uni-duesseldorf.de.ORCID 0000-0002-3002-1916
Thomas L HeiseInstitute for Public Health and Nursing Research-IPP, Health Sciences Bremen, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.
Ute LinnenkampInstitute for Health Services Research and Health Economics, German Diabetes Center (DDZ), Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at Heinrich Heine University, Auf'm Hennekamp 65, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Charalabos-Markos Dintsios
Stefan K LhachimiInstitute for Public Health and Nursing Research-IPP, Health Sciences Bremen, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.
Andrea IcksInstitute for Health Services Research and Health Economics, German Diabetes Center (DDZ), Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at Heinrich Heine University, Auf'm Hennekamp 65, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Deutsches Diabetes-Zentrum e.V. · DEUniversity of Bremen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), a highly prevalent chronic disease, puts a large burden on individual health and health care systems. Computer simulation models, used to evaluate the clinical and economic effectiveness of various interventions to handle T2DM, have become a well-established tool in diabetes research. Despite the broad consensus about the general importance of validation, especially external validation, as a crucial instrument of assessing and controlling for the quality of these models, there are no systematic reviews comparing such validation of diabetes models. As a result, the main objectives of this systematic review are to identify and appraise the different approaches used for the external validation of existing models covering the development and progression of T2DM.

methodsWe will perform adapted searches by applying respective search strategies to identify suitable studies from 14 electronic databases. Retrieved study records will be included or excluded based on predefined eligibility criteria as defined in this protocol. Among others, a publication filter will exclude studies published before 1995. We will run abstract and full text screenings and then extract data from all selected studies by filling in a predefined data extraction spreadsheet. We will undertake a descriptive, narrative synthesis of findings to address the study objectives. We will pay special attention to aspects of quality of these models in regard to the external validation based upon ISPOR and ADA recommendations as well as Mount Hood Challenge reports. All critical stages within the screening, data extraction and synthesis processes will be conducted by at least two authors. This protocol adheres to PRISMA and PRISMA-P standards. DISCUSSION: The proposed systematic review will provide a broad overview of the current practice in the external validation of models with respect to T2DM incidence and progression in humans built on simulation techniques. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017069983 .

Indexed as

Computer SimulationDelivery of Health CareDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Disease ProgressionHumansDiabetes modelsExternal validationSimulationSystematic reviewType 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID29284543
PMCPMC5746956
OpenAlexW2777069332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.