Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34081206›Full record

SynthesisActa diabetologica2021

Decision models in type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review.

Jiayu Li, Yun Bao, Xuedi Chen, Limin Tian

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Acta diabetologica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Using QALYs as an Outcome for Assessing Global Prediction Accuracy in Diabetes Simulation Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025
    Article
  7. Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmacist Care in Diabetes Management: A Systematic Review.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

4 authors.

Jiayu Li *Department of Endocrinology, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China.
Yun Bao *Clinical Research Center for Metabolic Diseases, No. 204 Donggang west road, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China.
Xuedi ChenDepartment of Endocrinology, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China.
Limin TianDepartment of Endocrinology, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, 730000, Gansu Province, China. tlm6666@sina.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4769-4375

Funding

Gansu Province Health Industry Research Project GSWSKY2020-08National Key R&D Program of China 2018YFC1311502
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo reduce the burden of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), the disease decision model plays a vital role in supporting decision-making. Currently, there is no comprehensive summary and assessment of the existing decision models for T2DM. The objective of this review is to provide an overview of the characteristics and capabilities of published decision models for T2DM. We also discuss which models are suitable for different study demands. MATERIALS AND

methodsFour databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) were electronically searched for papers published from inception to August 2020. Search terms were: "Diabetes-Mellitus, Type 2", "cost-utility", "quality-of-life", and "decision model". Reference lists of the included studies were manually searched. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts following the inclusion and exclusion criteria. If there was insufficient information to include or exclude a study, then a full-text version was sought. The extracted information included basic information, study details, population characteristics, basic modeling methodologies, model structure, and data inputs for the included applications, model outcomes, model validation, and uncertainty.

resultsFourteen unique decision models for T2DM were identified. Markov chains and risk equations were utilized by four and three models, respectively. Three models utilized both. Except for the Archimedes model, all other models (n = 13) implemented an annual cycle length. The time horizon of most models was flexible. Fourteen models had differences in the division of health states. Ten models emphasized macrovascular and microvascular complications. Six models included adverse events. Majority of the models (n = 11) were patient-level simulation models. Eleven models simulated annual changes in risk factors (body mass index, glycemia, HbA1c, blood pressure (systolic and/or diastolic), and lipids (total cholesterol and/or high-density lipoprotein)). All models reported the main data sources used to develop health states of complications. Most models (n = 11) could deal with the uncertainty of models, which were described in varying levels of detail in the primary studies. Eleven studies reported that one or more validation checks were performed.

conclusionsThe existing decision models for T2DM are heterogeneous in terms of the level of detail in the classification of health states. Thus, more attention should be focused on balancing the desired level of complexity against the required level of transparency in the development of T2DM decision models.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Blood GlucoseHumansMarkov ChainsBlood GlucoseCost-utilityDecision modelSimulationType 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID34081206
PMCPMC8505393

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.