ArticleDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2026
Evaluation of Diabetes Risk Models Applied to the Prediction of Incident Dysglycaemia in African and European Populations.
Article in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2026. 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.
- Evaluation of Diabetes Risk Models Applied to the Prediction of Incident Dysglycaemia in African and European Populations.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsWe evaluated overall and sex-specific performance of established diabetes risk models for predicting incident dysglycaemia in African and European populations. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe externally evaluated the African Diabetes Risk model, Finnish Diabetes Risk model, Epidemiological Study on the Insulin Resistance Syndrome model and the personal and clinical Framingham models. Evaluation was performed in three prospective cohorts: the Research on Obesity and Diabetes among African Migrants (RODAM-Pros; migrant and non-migrant Ghanaians; n = 1607), the Middle-aged Soweto cohort (MASC; urban Black South Africans; n = 515) and the Västerbotten Intervention Programme (VIP; Sweden; n = 3044). Dysglycaemia was defined according to American Diabetes Association criteria. Discrimination (c-statistic) and calibration were assessed before and after recalibration.
resultsDysglycaemia developed in 17.7% of RODAM-Pros participants, 35.0% of MASC participants and 27.5% of VIP participants, with median follow-up of 6.7, 6.7 and 9.9 years, respectively. All models demonstrated poor-to-modest discrimination (c-statistic < 0.7). Most models substantially underestimated risk. Recalibration eliminated systematic miscalibration and reduced calibration error to ≤ 2.3% in RODAM-Pros and VIP and ≤ 3.4% in MASC. Performance varied by sex and cohort.
conclusionsExisting diabetes risk prediction models can be applied to predict incident dysglycaemia in both Sub-Saharan African and European populations, but only after recalibration to local risk levels.
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.