Dataset Information

Prediction of type 2 diabetes risk in people with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia: model derivation and validation using UK primary care data.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Using primary care data, develop and validate sex-specific prognostic models that estimate the 10-year risk of people with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia developing type 2 diabetes. DESIGN:Retrospective cohort study. SETTING:Primary care. PARTICIPANTS:154?705 adult patients with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia. PRIMARY OUTCOME:Development of type 2 diabetes. METHODS:This study used data routinely collected in UK primary care from general practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Patients were split into development (n=109?077) and validation datasets (n=45?628). Potential predictor variables, including demographic and lifestyle factors, medical and family history, prescribed medications and clinical measures, were included in survival models following the imputation of missing data. Measures of calibration at 10 years and discrimination were determined using the validation dataset. RESULTS:In the development dataset, 9332 patients developed type 2 diabetes during 293?238 person-years of follow-up (31.8 (95% CI 31.2 to 32.5) per 1000 person-years). In the validation dataset, 3783 patients developed type 2 diabetes during 115?113 person-years of follow-up (32.9 (95% CI 31.8 to 33.9) per 1000 person-years). The final prognostic models comprised 14 and 16 predictor variables for males and females, respectively. Both models had good calibration and high levels of discrimination. The performance statistics for the male model were: Harrell's C statistic of 0.700 in the development and 0.701 in the validation dataset, with a calibration slope of 0.974 (95% CI 0.905 to 1.042) in the validation dataset. For the female model, Harrell's C statistics were 0.720 and 0.718, respectively, while the calibration slope was 0.994 (95% CI 0.931 to 1.057) in the validation dataset. CONCLUSION:These models could be used in primary care to identify those with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia most at risk of developing type 2 diabetes for targeted referral to the National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme.

SUBMITTER: Coles B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7590356 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prediction of type 2 diabetes risk in people with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia: model derivation and validation using UK primary care data.

Coles Briana B Khunti Kamlesh K Booth Sarah S Zaccardi Francesco F Davies Melanie J MJ Gray Laura J LJ

BMJ open 20201023 10

<h4>Objective</h4>Using primary care data, develop and validate sex-specific prognostic models that estimate the 10-year risk of people with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia developing type 2 diabetes.<h4>Design</h4>Retrospective cohort study.<h4>Setting</h4>Primary care.<h4>Participants</h4>154 705 adult patients with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia.<h4>Primary outcome</h4>Development of type 2 diabetes.<h4>Methods</h4>This study used data routinely collected in UK primary care from general practices co ...[more]

PMID: 33099496

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesFalls are a common problem in older people. Postural hypotension contributes to falls but is often asymptomatic. In the absence of symptoms, postural hypotension is only infrequently checked for in clinical practice. We undertook this study to derive, validate and explore the prospective associations of a prediction tool to identify people likely to have unrecognised postural hypotension.Design and settingCross-sectional and prospective multivariable cohort analysis.Participants1317 participants of the Invecchiare in Chianti study, a population-based cohort representative of the older Italian population.Primary outcome measuresPredictive value of score to suggest presence of postural hypotension.MethodsSubjects were randomised 1:1 to derivation or validation cohorts. Within the derivation cohort, univariable associations for candidate predictors of postural hypotension were tested. Variables with p<0.1 entered multivariable linear regression models. Factors retaining multivariable significance were incorporated into unweighted and weighted Detecting Risk Of Postural hypotension (DROP) scores. These scores were tested in the validation cohort against prediction of postural hypotension, cognitive decline and mortality over 9 years of follow-up.ResultsPostural hypotension was present in 203 (15.4%) of participants. Factors predicting postural hypotension were: digoxin use, Parkinson's disease, hypertension, stroke or cardiovascular disease and an interarm systolic blood pressure difference. Area under the curve was consistent at 0.65 for all models, with significant ORs of 1.8 to 2.4 per unit increase in score for predicting postural hypotension. For a DROP score ?1, five cases need to be tested to identify one with postural hypotension.Increasing DROP scores predicted mortality (OR 1.8 to 2.8 per unit rise) and increasing rates of decline of Mini Mental State Examination score (analysis of variance p<0.001) over 9 years of follow-up.ConclusionsThe DROP score provides a simple method to identify people likely to have postural hypotension and increased risks to health who require further evaluation.

Project description:BackgroundAccurate assessment of COVID-19 severity in the community is essential for patient care and requires COVID-19-specific risk prediction scores adequately validated in a community setting. Following a qualitative phase to identify signs, symptoms, and risk factors, we aimed to develop and validate two COVID-19-specific risk prediction scores. Remote COVID-19 Assessment in Primary Care-General Practice score (RECAP-GP; without peripheral oxygen saturation [SpO2]) and RECAP-oxygen saturation score (RECAP-O2; with SpO2).MethodsRECAP was a prospective cohort study that used multivariable logistic regression. Data on signs and symptoms (predictors) of disease were collected from community-based patients with suspected COVID-19 via primary care electronic health records and linked with secondary data on hospital admission (outcome) within 28 days of symptom onset. Data sources for RECAP-GP were Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre (RCGP-RSC) primary care practices (development set), northwest London primary care practices (validation set), and the NHS COVID-19 Clinical Assessment Service (CCAS; validation set). The data source for RECAP-O2 was the Doctaly Assist platform (development set and validation set in subsequent sample). The two probabilistic risk prediction models were built by backwards elimination using the development sets and validated by application to the validation datasets. Estimated sample size per model, including the development and validation sets was 2880 people.FindingsData were available from 8311 individuals. Observations, such as SpO2, were mostly missing in the northwest London, RCGP-RSC, and CCAS data; however, SpO2 was available for 1364 (70·0%) of 1948 patients who used Doctaly. In the final predictive models, RECAP-GP (n=1863) included sex (male and female), age (years), degree of breathlessness (three point scale), temperature symptoms (two point scale), and presence of hypertension (yes or no); the area under the curve was 0·80 (95% CI 0·76-0·85) and on validation the negative predictive value of a low risk designation was 99% (95% CI 98·1-99·2; 1435 of 1453). RECAP-O2 included age (years), degree of breathlessness (two point scale), fatigue (two point scale), and SpO2 at rest (as a percentage); the area under the curve was 0·84 (0·78-0·90) and on validation the negative predictive value of low risk designation was 99% (95% CI 98·9-99·7; 1176 of 1183).InterpretationBoth RECAP models are valid tools to assess COVID-19 patients in the community. RECAP-GP can be used initially, without need for observations, to identify patients who require monitoring. If the patient is monitored and SpO2 is available, RECAP-O2 is useful to assess the need for treatment escalation.FundingCommunity Jameel and the Imperial College President's Excellence Fund, the Economic and Social Research Council, UK Research and Innovation, and Health Data Research UK.

Project description:Aims/hypothesisThe aims of this study were to identify all published prognostic models predicting retinopathy risk applicable to people with type 2 diabetes, to assess their quality and accuracy, and to validate their predictive accuracy in a head-to-head comparison using an independent type 2 diabetes cohort.MethodsA systematic search was performed in PubMed and Embase in December 2019. Studies that met the following criteria were included: (1) the model was applicable in type 2 diabetes; (2) the outcome was retinopathy; and (3) follow-up was more than 1 year. Screening, data extraction (using the checklist for critical appraisal and data extraction for systemic reviews of prediction modelling studies [CHARMS]) and risk of bias assessment (by prediction model risk of bias assessment tool [PROBAST]) were performed independently by two reviewers. Selected models were externally validated in the large Hoorn Diabetes Care System (DCS) cohort in the Netherlands. Retinopathy risk was calculated using baseline data and compared with retinopathy incidence over 5 years. Calibration after intercept adjustment and discrimination (Harrell's C statistic) were assessed.ResultsTwelve studies were included in the systematic review, reporting on 16 models. Outcomes ranged from referable retinopathy to blindness. Discrimination was reported in seven studies with C statistics ranging from 0.55 (95% CI 0.54, 0.56) to 0.84 (95% CI 0.78, 0.88). Five studies reported on calibration. Eight models could be compared head-to-head in the DCS cohort (N = 10,715). Most of the models underestimated retinopathy risk. Validating the models against different severities of retinopathy, C statistics ranged from 0.51 (95% CI 0.49, 0.53) to 0.89 (95% CI 0.88, 0.91).Conclusions/interpretationSeveral prognostic models can accurately predict retinopathy risk in a population-based type 2 diabetes cohort. Most of the models include easy-to-measure predictors enhancing their applicability. Tailoring retinopathy screening frequency based on accurate risk predictions may increase the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of diabetic retinopathy care.RegistrationPROSPERO registration ID CRD42018089122.

Project description:AbstractMost studies on the prediction of venous thromboembolism (VTE) focused on hospitalized, surgery, and cancer patients or women receiving hormonal contraceptives or menopausal hormone therapy. No study considered diabetic and general populations to establish a VTE prediction model, especially in Asia. We developed a predictive model for VTE among type 2 diabetic patients and the general population.This study considered 2 nationwide retrospective cohort studies consisting of 52,427 diabetic participants and 508,664 participants from the general population aged 30 to 85 years during 2001 to 2004 in Taiwan. All participants were followed up until VTE event, death, or December 2011. The outcome event was VTE, including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Candidate predictors consisted of socio-demographic factors, diabetes-related factors and biomarkers, comorbidities, and medicine use. Our study followed the procedures proposed by the Framingham Heart Study to develop prediction models by using a Cox regression model. The predictive accuracy and performance characteristics were assessed using the area under curve of receiver operating characteristics curve and calibration of a risk score were performed by Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test.The common factors for persons with type 2 diabetes and general population included age, hospitalization status 1 year before the baseline, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and anti-diabetes medications; the specific factors for persons with type 2 diabetes consisted of body mass index, glycosylated hemoglobin A1C, and creatinine; and the factors for general population included gender, peripheral vascular disease, cancer, hypertension medication, cardiovascular medication, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. The area under curve of 3-, 5-, and 8-year VTE prediction models were 0.74, 0.71, and 0.69 in the diabetic population and 0.77, 0.76, and 0.75 in the general population, respectively.The new clinical prediction models can help identify a high risk of VTE and provide medical intervention in diabetic and general populations.

Dataset Information

Prediction of type 2 diabetes risk in people with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia: model derivation and validation using UK primary care data.

Publications

Prediction of type 2 diabetes risk in people with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia: model derivation and validation using UK primary care data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets