Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34567135›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of endocrinology and metabolism2021

Prediction Models for Type 2 Diabetes Risk in the General Population: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies.

Samaneh Asgari, Davood Khalili, Farhad Hosseinpanah, Farzad Hadaegh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of endocrinology and metabolism, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

4 authors.

Samaneh AsgariPrevention of Metabolic Disorders Research Center, Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Davood KhaliliPrevention of Metabolic Disorders Research Center, Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Farhad HosseinpanahObesity Research Center, Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences, Shaheed Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5235-9451
Farzad HadaeghPrevention of Metabolic Disorders Research Center, Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study aimed to provide an overview of prediction models of undiagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (U-T2DM) or the incident T2DM (I-T2DM) using the transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD) checklist and the prediction model risk of the bias assessment tool (PROBAST). DATA SOURCES: Both PUBMED and EMBASE databases were searched to guarantee adequate and efficient coverage. STUDY SELECTION: Articles published between December 2011 and October 2019 were considered. DATA EXTRACTION: For each article, information on model development requirements, discrimination measures, calibration, overall performance, clinical usefulness, overfitting, and risk of bias (ROB) was reported.

resultsThe median (interquartile range; IQR) number of the 46 study populations for model development was 5711 (1971 - 27426) and 2457 (2060 - 6995) individuals for I-T2DM and U-T2DM, respectively. The most common reported predictors were age and body mass index, and only the Qrisk-2017 study included social factors (e.g., Townsend score). Univariable analysis was reported in 46% of the studies, and the variable selection procedure was not clear in 17.4% of them. Moreover, internal and external validation was reported in 43% the studies, while over 63% of them reported calibration. The median (IQR) of AUC for I-T2DM models was 0.78 (0.74 - 0.82); the corresponding value for studies derived before October 2011 was 0.80 (0.77 - 0.83). The highest discrimination index was reported for Qrisk-2017 with C-statistics of 0.89 for women and 0.87 for men. Low ROB for I-T2DM and U-T2DM was assessed at 18% and 41%, respectively.

conclusionsAmong prediction models, an intermediate to poor quality was reassessed in several aspects of model development and validation. Generally, despite its new risk factors or new methodological aspects, the newly developed model did not increase our capability in screening/predicting T2DM, mainly in the analysis part. It was due to the lack of external validation of the prediction models.

Indexed as

Prediction ModelsPROBASTSystematic ReviewTRIPODType 2 Diabetes

Identifiers

PMID34567135
PMCPMC8453657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.