ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2025
Development and validation of a nomogram prediction model for coronary heart disease in diabetic patients: a study based on the 2011-2020 NHANES database.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Prognostic Models for Predicting Coronary Heart Disease Risk in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo analyze the risk and influencing factors for coronary heart disease (CHD) in patients with diabetes (DM), and to develop and validate a nomogram prediction model, providing a basis for the early diagnosis and individualized intervention in patients with DM and CHD.
methodsThis study was based on data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). A total of 2,141 diabetic patients from 2011 to 2020 were included, randomly divided into a training set (n = 1,499) and a validation set (n = 642) at a 7:3 ratio. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) regression analysis was used to screen risk factors, and a multivariate logistic regression model was developed to construct the DM-CHD nomogram prediction model. Model performance was internally validated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA).The Hosmer-Lemeshow Test was utilized to evaluate the overall goodness of fit of the nomogram.
resultsUnivariate analysis identified 15 factors as risk factors for DM-related CHD. Lasso regression further selected 7 key predictors: Age (OR 1.06, CI 1.05-1.08, P < 0.001), Gender (OR 0.47, CI 0.36-0.63, P < 0.001), Hypertension (OR 1.85, CI 1.33-2.57, P < 0.001), Weight Adjusted Waist Index (OR 1.50, CI 1.25-1.81, P < 0.001), Neutrophils (OR 1.09, CI 1.02-1.17, P = 0.009), Platelets (OR 0.99, CI 0.99-0.99, P < 0.001), and Triglycerides (OR 1.18, CI 1.08-1.30, P < 0.001). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for the nomogram model was 0.758 (95% CI 0.728-0.789) in the training set and 0.747 (95% CI 0.699-0.796) in the validation set. Calibration curves and DCA indicated that the model exhibited satisfactory predictive performance. The model's reliability and clinical net benefit were further validated.
conclusionThe nomogram model developed in this study, based on multiple clinical indicators (Age, Gender, Hypertension, Weight Adjusted Waist Index, Neutrophils, Platelets, and Triglycerides), demonstrated adequate calibration and clinical net benefit in the validation cohort. The model demonstrates moderate but clinically useful discrimination ability, providing scientific guidance for early diagnosis and personalized interventions in patients with DM complicated by CHD, and may help reduce CHD risk in diabetic patients.
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.