SynthesisJournal of nephrology2022
External validation of prognostic models for chronic kidney disease among type 2 diabetes.
Synthesis in Journal of nephrology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk Prediction Score for Chronic Kidney Disease in Healthy Adults and Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: Systematic Review.Preventing chronic disease · 2023Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVarious prognostic models have been derived to predict chronic kidney disease (CKD) development in type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, their generalisability and predictive performance in different populations remain largely unvalidated. This study aimed to externally validate several prognostic models of CKD in a T2D Thai cohort.
methodsA nationwide survey was linked with hospital databases to create a prospective cohort of patients with diabetes (n = 3416). We undertook a systematic review to identify prognostic models and traditional metrics (i.e., discrimination and calibration) to compare model performance for CKD prediction. We updated prognostic models by including additional clinical parameters to optimise model performance in the Thai setting.
resultsSix relevant previously published models were identified. At baseline, C-statistics ranged from 0.585 (0.565-0.605) to 0.786 (0.765-0.806) for CKD and 0.657 (0.610-0.703) to 0.760 (0.705-0.816) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD). All original CKD models showed fair calibration with Observed/Expected (O/E) ratios ranging from 0.999 (0.975-1.024) to 1.009 (0.929-1.090). Hosmer-Lemeshow tests indicated a good fit for all models. The addition of routine clinical factors (i.e., glucose level and oral diabetes medications) enhanced model prediction by improved C-statistics of Low's of 0.114 for CKD and Elley's of 0.025 for ESRD.
conclusionsAll models showed moderate discrimination and fair calibration. Updating models to include routine clinical factors substantially enhanced their accuracy. Low's (developed in Singapore) and Elley's model (developed in New Zealand), outperformed the other models evaluated. These models can assist clinicians to improve the risk-stratification of diabetic patients for CKD and/or ESRD in the regions settings are similar to Thailand.
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.