ArticleGlobal heart2022
Prediction of Five-Year Cardiovascular Disease Risk in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Derivation in Nanjing, China and External Validation in Scotland, UK.
Article in Global heart, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Overcoming Missing Data: Accurately Predicting Cardiovascular Risk in Type 2 Diabetes, A Systematic Review.Journal of diabetes · 2025Pooled it
- Narrative review of the development of an ischaemic heart disease prognostic scoring tool (i-IHD score) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Malaysia.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2026Review
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 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background: To use routinely collected data to develop a five-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction model for Chinese adults with type 2 diabetes with validation of its performance in a population of European ancestry. Methods: People with incident type 2 diabetes and no history of CVD at diagnosis of diabetes between 2008 and 2017 were included in derivation and validation cohorts. The derivation cohort was identified from a pseudonymized research extract of data from the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University (NMU). Five-year risk of CVD was estimated using basic and extended Cox proportional hazards regression models including 6 and 11 predictors respectively. The risk prediction models were internally validated and externally validated in a Scottish population-based cohort with CVD events identified from linked hospital records. Discrimination and calibration were assessed using Harrell's C-statistic and calibration plots, respectively. Results: Mean age of the derivation and validation cohorts were 58.4 and 59.2 years, respectively, with 53.5% and 56.9% men. During a median follow-up time of 4.75 [2.67, 7.42] years, 18,827 (22.25%) of the 84,630 people in the NMU-Diabetes cohort and 8,763 (7.31%) of the Scottish cohort of 119,891 people developed CVD. The extended model had a C-statistic of 0.723 [0.721-0.724] in internal validation and 0.716 [0.713-0.719] in external validation. Conclusions: It is possible to generate a risk prediction model with moderate discriminative power in internal and external validation derived from routinely collected Chinese hospital data. The proposed risk score could be used to improve CVD prevention in people with diabetes.
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.