Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31745647›Full record

ArticleActa diabetologica2020

Selecting the optimal risk threshold of diabetes risk scores to identify high-risk individuals for diabetes prevention: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Kristin Mühlenbruch, Xiaohui Zhuo, Barbara Bardenheier, Hui Shao, Michael Laxy, Andrea Icks, Ping Zhang, Edward W Gregg, Matthias B Schulze

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Acta diabetologica, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in Germany: benefits and costs.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

9 authors.

Kristin MühlenbruchDepartment of Molecular Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbruecke, Nuthetal, Germany.
Xiaohui ZhuoDivision of Diabetes Translation, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Barbara BardenheierDivision of Diabetes Translation, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Hui ShaoDivision of Diabetes Translation, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Michael LaxyGerman Center for Diabetes Research (DZD), Neuherberg, Germany.
Andrea IcksGerman Center for Diabetes Research (DZD), Neuherberg, Germany.
Ping ZhangDivision of Diabetes Translation, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Edward W GreggDivision of Diabetes Translation, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Matthias B SchulzeDepartment of Molecular Epidemiology, German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbruecke, Nuthetal, Germany. mschulze@dife.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0830-5277

Funding

German Ministry of Education and Research and the State of Brandenburg DZD grant 82DZD00302
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsAlthough risk scores to predict type 2 diabetes exist, cost-effectiveness of risk thresholds to target prevention interventions are unknown. We applied cost-effectiveness analysis to identify optimal thresholds of predicted risk to target a low-cost community-based intervention in the USA.

methodsWe used a validated Markov-based type 2 diabetes simulation model to evaluate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of alternative thresholds of diabetes risk. Population characteristics for the model were obtained from NHANES 2001-2004 and incidence rates and performance of two noninvasive diabetes risk scores (German diabetes risk score, GDRS, and ARIC 2009 score) were determined in the ARIC and Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for increasing risk score thresholds. Two scenarios were assumed: 1-stage (risk score only) and 2-stage (risk score plus fasting plasma glucose (FPG) test (threshold 100 mg/dl) in the high-risk group).

resultsIn ARIC and CHS combined, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the GDRS and the ARIC 2009 score were 0.691 (0.677-0.704) and 0.720 (0.707-0.732), respectively. The optimal threshold of predicted diabetes risk (ICER < $50,000/QALY gained in case of intervention in those above the threshold) was 7% for the GDRS and 9% for the ARIC 2009 score. In the 2-stage scenario, ICERs for all cutoffs ≥ 5% were below $50,000/QALY gained.

conclusionsIntervening in those with ≥ 7% diabetes risk based on the GDRS or ≥ 9% on the ARIC 2009 score would be cost-effective. A risk score threshold ≥ 5% together with elevated FPG would also allow targeting interventions cost-effectively.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningPreventive Health ServicesAdultAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHumansIncidenceLife StyleMaleMiddle AgedNutrition SurveysPrediabetic StateQuality-Adjusted Life YearsResearch DesignClinical prediction ruleCost-effectiveness analysisDiabetes mellitus, Type 2Lifestyle risk reduction

Identifiers

PMID31745647
PMCPMC7093341

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.