ArticleDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2021
Electronic Medical Record Risk Modeling of Cardiovascular Outcomes Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.
Article in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence in the risk prediction models of cardiovascular disease and development of an independent validation screening tool: a systematic review.BMC medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Development and validation of prediction models for stroke and myocardial infarction in type 2 diabetes based on health insurance claims: does machine learning outperform traditional regression approaches?Cardiovascular diabetology · 2025Article
- Signals in the Cells: Multimodal and Contextualized Machine Learning Foundations for Therapeutics.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIncreased utilization of electronic health records (EHR) has enriched databases for creating risk models. We used machine learning techniques to develop an EHR-based risk model locally fitted to patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) for predicting cardiovascular disease.
methodsThis retrospective observational study was conducted within Ochsner Health, Louisiana, USA, between 2013-2017. Data analysis included 6245 patients who had two outpatient diagnoses of T2DM recorded on separate days or a diagnosis recorded during an inpatient encounter. Baseline clinical data were limited to 180 days before the index diagnosis. Cardiovascular outcomes were coronary heart disease (CHD), heart failure and stroke. Machine learning approaches were used to select predictor variables into Cox proportional hazards models for each outcome. Locally fit equations were compared to "generalized" risk equations (RECODe, AS-CVD, QRISK3) using model discrimination and calibration.
resultsAmong factors identified in the Ochsner (n = 11), RECODe (n = 14), AS-CVD (n = 15) and QRISK3 (n = 23), only age was common to all four risk equations. The Ochsner model had high internal discrimination for CHD (C-statistics 0.85) and better discrimination than RECODe (C-statistics 0.45), the QRISK3 (C-statistics 0.72) and AS-CVD (C-statistics 0.54).
conclusionsThe Ochsner model overestimated 5-year CHD risk, but had relatively higher calibration than the other models in CHD. Risk equations fitted for local populations improved cardiovascular risk stratification for patients with T2DM. Application of machine learning simplified the models compared to "generalized" risk equations.
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.