ArticleInternational journal of epidemiology2022
Incremental value of risk factor variability for cardiovascular risk prediction in individuals with type 2 diabetes: results from UK primary care electronic health records.
Article in International journal of epidemiology, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive Factors for Predicting the Complications of DiabetesMellitus: A Systematic Review.Current diabetes reviews · 2024Pooled 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
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction models for individuals with type 2 diabetes are important tools to guide intensification of interventions for CVD prevention. We aimed to assess the added value of incorporating risk factors variability in CVD risk prediction for people with type 2 diabetes.
methodsWe used electronic health records (EHRs) data from 83 910 adults with type 2 diabetes but without pre-existing CVD from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink for 2004-2017. Using a landmark-modelling approach, we developed and validated sex-specific Cox models, incorporating conventional predictors and trajectories plus variability of systolic blood pressure (SBP), total and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Such models were compared against simpler models using single last observed values or means.
resultsThe standard deviations (SDs) of SBP, HDL cholesterol and HbA1c were associated with higher CVD risk (P < 0.05). Models incorporating trajectories and variability of continuous predictors demonstrated improvement in risk discrimination (C-index = 0.659, 95% CI: 0.654-0.663) as compared with using last observed values (C-index = 0.651, 95% CI: 0.646-0.656) or means (C-index = 0.650, 95% CI: 0.645-0.655). Inclusion of SDs of SBP yielded the greatest improvement in discrimination (C-index increase = 0.005, 95% CI: 0.004-0.007) in comparison to incorporating SDs of total cholesterol (C-index increase = 0.002, 95% CI: 0.000-0.003), HbA1c (C-index increase = 0.002, 95% CI: 0.000-0.003) or HDL cholesterol (C-index increase= 0.003, 95% CI: 0.002-0.005).
conclusionIncorporating variability of predictors from EHRs provides a modest improvement in CVD risk discrimination for individuals with type 2 diabetes. Given that repeat measures are readily available in EHRs especially for regularly monitored patients with diabetes, this improvement could easily be achieved.
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.