An accurate risk score for estimation 5-year risk of type 2 diabetes based on a health screening population in Taiwan

2009 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 228-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Sun ◽  
Qiushan Tao ◽  
Siyan Zhan
Diabetes ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1645-P
Author(s):  
JOHANNE TREMBLAY ◽  
REDHA ATTAOUA ◽  
MOUNSIF HALOUI ◽  
RAMZAN TAHIR ◽  
CAROLE LONG ◽  
...  

Diabetes ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 304-OR
Author(s):  
MICHAEL L. MULTHAUP ◽  
RYOSUKE KITA ◽  
NICHOLAS ERIKSSON ◽  
STELLA ASLIBEKYAN ◽  
JANIE SHELTON ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 204201882097419
Author(s):  
Nienke M. A. Idzerda ◽  
Sok Cin Tye ◽  
Dick de Zeeuw ◽  
Hiddo J. L. Heerspink

Background: Risk factor-based equations are used to predict risk of kidney disease progression in patients with type 2 diabetes order to guide treatment decisions. It is, however, unknown whether these models can also be used to predict the effects of drugs on clinical outcomes. Methods: The previously developed Parameter Response Efficacy (PRE) score, which integrates multiple short-term drug effects, was first compared with the existing risk scores, Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) and The Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) renal risk score, in its performance to predict end-stage renal disease (ESRD; KFRE) and doubling of serum creatinine or ESRD (ADVANCE). Second, changes in the risk scores were compared after 6 months’ treatment to predict the long-term effects of losartan on these renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease. Results: The KFRE, ADVANCE and PRE scores showed similarly good performance in predicting renal risk. However, for prediction of the effect of losartan, the KFRE risk score predicted a relative risk change in the occurrence of ESRD of 3.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) −5 to 12], whereas the observed risk change was −28.8% (95% CI −42.0 to −11.5). For the composite endpoint of doubling of serum creatinine or ESRD, the ADVANCE score predicted a risk change of −12.4% (95% CI −17 to −7), which underestimated the observed risk change −21.8% (95% CI −34 to −6). The PRE score predicted renal risk changes that were close to the observed risk changes with losartan treatment [−24.0% (95% CI −30 to −17) and −22.6% (95% CI −23 to −16) for ESRD and the composite renal outcome, respectively]. Conclusion: A drug response score such as the PRE score may assist in improving clinical decision making and implement precision medicine strategies.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e0142779 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akiko Nanri ◽  
Tohru Nakagawa ◽  
Keisuke Kuwahara ◽  
Shuichiro Yamamoto ◽  
Toru Honda ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard Omech ◽  
Julius Chacha Mwita ◽  
Jose-Gaby Tshikuka ◽  
Billy Tsima ◽  
Oathokwa Nkomazna ◽  
...  

This was a cross-sectional study designed to assess the validity of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score for detecting undiagnosed type 2 diabetes among general medical outpatients in Botswana. Participants aged ≥20 years without previously diagnosed diabetes were screened by (1) an 8-item Finnish diabetes risk assessment questionnaire and (2) Haemoglobin A1c test. Data from 291 participants were analyzed (74.2% were females). The mean age of the participants was 50.1 (SD = ±11) years, and the prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes was 42 (14.4%) with no significant differences between the gender (20% versus 12.5%,P=0.26). The area under curve for detecting undiagnosed diabetes was 0.63 (95% CI 0.55–0.72) for the total population, 0.65 (95% CI: 0.56–0.75) for women, and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.52–0.83) for men. The optimal cut-off point for detecting undiagnosed diabetes was 17 (sensitivity = 48% and specificity = 73%) for the total population, 17 (sensitivity = 56% and specificity = 66%) for females, and 13 (sensitivity = 53% and specificity = 77%) for males. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 20% and 89.5%, respectively. The findings indicate that the Finnish questionnaire was only modestly effective in predicting undiagnosed diabetes among outpatients in Botswana.


Author(s):  
Rocío Barrios-Rodríguez ◽  
Esther García-Esquinas ◽  
Beatriz Pérez-Gómez ◽  
Gemma Castaño-Vinyals ◽  
Javier Llorca ◽  
...  

Diabetes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1134-P
Author(s):  
SANGHYUK JUNG ◽  
DOKYOON KIM ◽  
MANU SHIVAKUMAR ◽  
HONG-HEE WON ◽  
JAE-SEUNG YUN

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-18
Author(s):  
N. Akter ◽  
N.K. Qureshi

Background: To identify individuals at high risk of developing type2 diabetes (T2DM), use of a validated risk-assessment tool is currently recommended. Nevertheless, recent studies have shown that risk scores that are developed in the same country can lead to different results of an individual. The Objective of study was to reveal whether two different risk-assessment tools predict similar or dissimilar high-risk score in same population. Method: This cross-sectional analytical study was carried upon 336 non-diabetic adults visiting the outpatient department (OPD) of Medicine, MARKS Medical College & Hospital, Bangladesh from October 2018 to March 2019. Woman having previous history of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) were also included. Both the Indian Diabetes risk Score (IDRS) and the American Diabetes (ADA) Risk Score questionnaire were used to collect the data on demographic and clinical characteristics, different risk factors of an individual subject, and to calculate predicted risk score for developing T2DM. Results: Among 336 subjects, 53.6% were female. The mean (±SD) age of the study subjects was 38.25±1.12 years. The average IDRS predicted risk score of developing T2DM was more in female subjects than male [p<0.05]. Whereas the ADA predicted increased risk score of developing type 2 diabetes was more in male subjects than female (p<0.05). IDRS categorized 37.2 % of individuals at high risk for developing diabetes; [p=0.10], while the ADA risk tool categorized 20.2% subjects in high risk group; [p<0.001]. Conclusions: The results indicate that risk for developing type 2 diabetes varies considerably according to the scoring system used. To adequately prevent T2DM, risk scoring systems must be validated for each population considered.


Diabetes Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. dc210464
Author(s):  
Maggie A. Stanislawski ◽  
Elizabeth Litkowski ◽  
Sridharan Raghavan ◽  
Kylie K. Harrall ◽  
Jessica Shaw ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document