ArticleBMC medical research methodology2019
Dynamic risk prediction for diabetes using biomarker change measurements.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Validation of a Diabetes Risk Prediction Model With Individualized Preventive Intervention Effects.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2025 · on this mapTrial
- Backward joint model for the joint dynamic prediction of time-to-event and longitudinal data: basic formulation and new developments.Lifetime data analysis · 2026Article
- Predicting kidney graft function and failure among kidney transplant recipients.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Dynamic risk prediction of survival in liver cirrhosis: A comparison of landmarking approaches.PloS one · 2024Article
- A comparison of two approaches to dynamic prediction: Joint modeling and landmark modeling.Statistics in medicine · 2023Article
- Predicting the risk of a clinical event using longitudinal data: the generalized landmark analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- HNF1A Mutations and Beta Cell Dysfunction in Diabetes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Dynamic Risk Prediction for Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injury in Adult Critical Care Patients.Critical care explorations · 2021Article
- Do statins reduce mortality in older people? Findings from a longitudinal study using primary care records.Family medicine and community health · 2021Article
- Dynamic prediction for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula: a novel prediction model for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.BMC surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDynamic risk models, which incorporate disease-free survival and repeated measurements over time, might yield more accurate predictions of future health status compared to static models. The objective of this study was to develop and apply a dynamic prediction model to estimate the risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus.
methodsBoth a static prediction model and a dynamic landmark model were used to provide predictions of a 2-year horizon time for diabetes-free survival, updated at 1, 2, and 3 years post-baseline i.e., predicting diabetes-free survival to 2 years and predicting diabetes-free survival to 3 years, 4 years, and 5 years post-baseline, given the patient already survived past 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years post-baseline, respectively. Prediction accuracy was evaluated at each time point using robust non-parametric procedures. Data from 2057 participants of the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) study (1027 in metformin arm, 1030 in placebo arm) were analyzed.
resultsThe dynamic landmark model demonstrated good prediction accuracy with area under curve (AUC) estimates ranging from 0.645 to 0.752 and Brier Score estimates ranging from 0.088 to 0.135. Relative to a static risk model, the dynamic landmark model did not significantly differ in terms of AUC but had significantly lower (i.e., better) Brier Score estimates for predictions at 1, 2, and 3 years (e.g. 0.167 versus 0.099; difference - 0.068 95% CI - 0.083 to - 0.053, at 3 years in placebo group) post-baseline.
conclusionsDynamic prediction models based on longitudinal, repeated risk factor measurements have the potential to improve the accuracy of future health status predictions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.