ArticleBMC public health2022
Recalibrating the Non-Communicable Diseases risk prediction tools for the rural population of Western India.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening performance of community-based assessment checklist compared with point of care screening tests to identify high-risk individuals for diabetes and hypertension in urban Mysore, India.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Congruity between WHO ISH laboratory and non-laboratory-based charts in an urban population in India: A cross-sectional community-based analytical study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2026Article
- Female cancer screening in India: Results from the National Family Health Survey (NFHS-5) and the way forward.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024Article
- Undiagnosed hypertension and associated factors among adults in the urban field practice area of AIIMS Raipur: A community-based screening survey.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2023Article
- Article
- Predictive Ability of the Indian Diabetes Risk Score in the Evaluation of Diabetes Risk among Urban Adults of Raipur: A Cross-sectional Study.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social MedicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the present study was to recalibrate the effectiveness of Indian Diabetes Risk Score (IDRS) and Community-Based Assessment Checklist (CBAC) by opportunistic screening of Diabetes Mellitus (DM) and Hypertension (HT) among the people attending health centres, and estimating the risk of fatal and non-fatal Cardio-Vascular Diseases (CVDs) among them using WHO/ISH charts.
methodsAll the people aged ≥ 30 years attending the health centers were screened for DM and HT. Weight, height, waist circumference, and hip circumferences were measured, and BMI and Waist-Hip Ratio (WHR) were calculated. Risk categorization of all participants was done using IDRS, CBAC, and WHO/ISH risk prediction charts. Individuals diagnosed with DM or HT were started on treatment. The data was recorded using Epicollect5 and was analyzed using SPSS v.23 and MedCalc v.19.8. ROC curves were plotted for DM and HT with the IDRS, CBAC score, and anthropometric parameters. Sensitivity (SN), specificity (SP), Positive Predictive Value (PPV), Negative Predictive Value (NPV), Accuracy and Youden's index were calculated for different cut-offs of IDRS and CBAC scores.
resultsA total of 942 participants were included for the screening, out of them, 9.2% (95% CI: 7.45-11.31) were diagnosed with DM for the first time. Hypertension was detected among 25.7% (95% CI: 22.9-28.5) of the participants. A total of 447 (47.3%) participants were found with IDRS score ≥ 60, and 276 (29.3%) with CBAC score > 4. As much as 26.1% were at moderate to higher risk (≥ 10%) of developing CVDs. Area Under the Curve (AUC) for IDRS in predicting DM was 0.64 (0.58-0.70), with 67.1% SN and 55.2% SP (Youden's Index 0.22). While the AUC for CBAC was 0.59 (0.53-0.65). For hypertension both the AUCs were 0.66 (0.62-0.71) and 0.63 (0.59-0.67), respectively.
conclusionsIDRS was found to have the maximum AUC and sensitivity thereby demonstrating its usefulness as compared to other tools for screening of both diabetes and hypertension. It thus has the potential to expose the hidden NCD iceberg. Hence, we propose IDRS as a useful tool in screening of Diabetes and Hypertension in rural India.
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.