ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2025
Competing Risks Analysis of the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study.
Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00518167 (The Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
The Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study: A Follow-up Study on the Effect of a Dietary and Exercise Intervention in the Prevention of Diabetes and Its Vascular Complications
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Response to "Enhance Multistate Models With Clinically Meaningful Graphs".CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2025Article
- Enhance Multistate Models With Clinically Meaningful Graphs.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2025Article
- Multistate model for pharmacometric analyses of overall survival in HER2-negative breast cancer patients treated with docetaxel.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical studies often observe one interesting event in the presence of other competing events. When both types of events can occur at any time but are only observed at clinical visits (i.e., interval censored), standard survival models may introduce bias in the estimated incidence of the interesting event over time. This can also lead to inflated relative differences between treatment groups. We developed a multi-state model for competing risks analysis of interval censored data from the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study. The developed model predicted the participants' clinical outcomes and demonstrated that lifestyle changes significantly decreased the risk of both diabetes and death. The model showed that those who dropped out were at lower risk of developing diabetes, neglecting the assumption of independent censoring. Furthermore, the model identified the most important covariates predicting the future development of diabetes, which should be targeted for therapeutic intervention in likely clinical scenarios. These covariates are baseline BMI, HbA1c, and insulin sensitivity measurements by QUICKI for the onset of developing T2DM, baseline BMI for dropping out, and sex and age as the predictive covariates of death. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00518167.
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.