ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2019
Discordance in prediction for prognosis of type 2 diabetes after metabolic surgery: comparison of the ABCD, DiaRem, and individualized metabolic surgery models.
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- External validation of predictive scores for diabetes remission after metabolic surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Article
- Metabolomics in Bariatric Surgery: Towards Identification of Mechanisms and Biomarkers of Metabolic Outcomes.Obesity surgery · 2021Review
- Review, Performance Comparison, and Validation of Models Predicting Type 2 Diabetes Remission After Bariatric Surgery in a Western European Population.Obesity surgery · 2021Article
- Metabolomic Profiles Predict Diabetes Remission after Bariatric Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Oncometabolic surgery: Emergence and legitimacy for investigation.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2020Article
- Bariatric metabolic surgery: An effective treatment of type 2 diabetes.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMetabolic surgery has been performed as a treatment option for uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D), and several scoring systems for predicting postoperative T2D remission have been proposed. This study was designed to assess consistency of 3 existing scoring systems in patients with T2D duration <1 year.
methodsThis study included 186 patients with T2D enrolled in a university hospital prospective database between 2011 and 2013. Externally validated scoring systems for predicting T2D prognosis after metabolic surgery were identified and selected through systematic literature search. We assessed concordance between ABCD, DiaRem, and individualized metabolic surgery (IMS) scores in participants using kappa statistical analysis and 1-way analysis of variance.
resultsOf the participants, 52 and 82 patients were expected to have favorable T2D remission after metabolic surgery with ABCD score of 10-5 and DiaRem score of 0-7, respectively, and a slight-to-fair concordance was shown between the 2 scoring systems (kappa measure, 0.07; standard error [SE], 0.05 and kappa measure, 0.25; SE, 0.19, respectively). The DiaRem score increased with T2D severity determined by IMS score (P < 0.001), while the ABCD score showed no significant association with IMS score.
conclusionABCD and DiaRem scores showed significant discordance when applied to potential metabolic surgery candidates in whom postoperative T2D remission rate was highly expected. The IMS score showed a dose-response association with DiaRem score but had no significant association with the ABCD score.
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.