Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39022345›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2024

Risk prediction models for diabetic nephropathy among type 2 diabetes patients in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wenbin Xu, Yanfei Zhou, Qian Jiang, Yiqian Fang, Qian Yang

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Wenbin XuSchool of Nursing, Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Yanfei ZhouSchool of Nursing, Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Qian JiangSchool of Nursing, Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Yiqian FangSchool of Nursing, Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Qian YangSchool of Nursing, Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study systematically reviews and meta-analyzes existing risk prediction models for diabetic kidney disease (DKD) among patients with type 2 diabetes, aiming to provide references for scholars in China to develop higher-quality risk prediction models. Methods: We searched databases including China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, VIP Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies on the construction of DKD risk prediction models among type 2 diabetes patients, up until 28 December 2023. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted and evaluated information according to a data extraction form and bias risk assessment tool for prediction model studies. The area under the curve (AUC) values of the models were meta-analyzed using STATA 14.0 software. Results: A total of 32 studies were included, with 31 performing internal validation and 22 reporting calibration. The incidence rate of DKD among patients with type 2 diabetes ranged from 6.0% to 62.3%. The AUC ranged from 0.713 to 0.949, indicating the prediction models have fair to excellent prediction accuracy. The overall applicability of the included studies was good; however, there was a high overall risk of bias, mainly due to the retrospective nature of most studies, unreasonable sample sizes, and studies conducted in a single center. Meta-analysis of the models yielded a combined AUC of 0.810 (95% CI: 0.780-0.840), indicating good predictive performance. Conclusion: Research on DKD risk prediction models for patients with type 2 diabetes in China is still in its initial stages, with a high overall risk of bias and a lack of clinical application. Future efforts could focus on constructing high-performance, easy-to-use prediction models based on interpretable machine learning methods and applying them in clinical settings. Registration: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, a recognized guideline for such research. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024498015.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Diabetic NephropathiesChinaHumansPrognosisRisk AssessmentRisk Factorsdiabetic kidney diseasemeta-analysisrisk prediction modelsystematic reviewtype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID39022345
PMCPMC11251916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.