Dataset Information

Prognostic models of diabetic microvascular complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT:

Background

Many prognostic models of diabetic microvascular complications have been developed, but their performances still varies. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarise the performances of the existing models.

Methods

Prognostic models of diabetic microvascular complications were retrieved from PubMed and Scopus up to 31 December 2020. Studies were selected, if they developed or internally/externally validated models of any microvascular complication in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Results

In total, 71 studies were eligible, of which 32, 30 and 18 studies initially developed prognostic model for diabetic retinopathy (DR), chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end stage renal disease (ESRD) with the number of derived equations of 84, 96 and 51, respectively. Most models were derived-phases, some were internal and external validations. Common predictors were age, sex, HbA1c, diabetic duration, SBP and BMI. Traditional statistical models (i.e. Cox and logit regression) were mostly applied, otherwise machine learning. In cohorts, the discriminative performance in derived-logit was pooled with C statistics of 0.82 (0.73‑0.92) for DR and 0.78 (0.74‑0.83) for CKD. Pooled Cox regression yielded 0.75 (0.74‑0.77), 0.78 (0.74‑0.82) and 0.87 (0.84‑0.89) for DR, CKD and ESRD, respectively. External validation performances were sufficiently pooled with 0.81 (0.78‑0.83), 0.75 (0.67‑0.84) and 0.87 (0.85‑0.88) for DR, CKD and ESRD, respectively.

Conclusions

Several prognostic models were developed, but less were externally validated. A few studies derived the models by using appropriate methods and were satisfactory reported. More external validations and impact analyses are required before applying these models in clinical practice.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42018105287

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-021-01841-z.

SUBMITTER: Saputro S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8561867 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe role of gut microbiota in diabetes mellitus (DM) and its complications has been widely accepted. However, the alternation of gut microbiota in diabetic microvascular complications (DC) remains to be determined.MethodsPublications (till August 20th, 2022) on gut microbiota in patients with DC were retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane. Review Manager 5.3 was performed to estimate the standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) and calculate alpha diversity indices and the relative abundance of gut microbiota between patients in DC v.s. DM and DC v.s. healthy controls (HC).ResultsWe included 13 studies assessing 329 patients with DC, 232 DM patients without DC, and 241 HC. Compared to DM, patients with DC shared a significantly lower Simpson index (SMD = -0.59, 95% CI [-0.82, -0.36], p < 0.00001), but a higher ACE index (SMD = 0.42, 95% CI[0.11, 0.74], p = 0.009). Compared to HC, DC patients held a lower ACE index (SMD = -0.61, 95% CI[-1.20, -0.02], p = 0.04). The relative abundances of phylum Proteobacteria (SMD = 0.03, 95% CI[0.01, 0.04], p = 0.003, v.s. HC) and genus Klebsiella (SMD = 0.00, 95% CI[0.00, 0.00], p < 0.00001, v.s. HC) were enriched, accompanying with depleted abundances of phylum Firmicutes (SMD = -0.06, 95% CI[-0.11, -0.01], p = 0.02, v.s. HC), genera Bifidobacterium (SMD = -0.01, 95% CI[-0.02,-0.01], p < 0.0001, v.s. DM), Faecalibacterium (SMD = -0.01, 95% CI[-0.02, -0.00], p = 0.009, v.s. DM; SMD = -0.02, 95% CI[-0.02, -0.01], p < 0.00001, v.s. HC) and Lactobacillus (SMD = 0.00, 95% CI[-0.00, -0.00], p < 0.00001, v.s. HC) in DC.ConclusionsGut microbiota perturbations with the depletion of alpha diversity and certain short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs)-producing bacteria were associated with the pathology of DC. Therefore, gut microbiota might serve as a promising approach for the diagnosis and treatment of DC. Further investigations are required to study the mechanisms by which gut dysbiosis acts on the onset and progression of DC.

Project description:BackgroundPrognostic tools for intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) patients are potentially useful for ascertaining prognosis and recommended in guidelines to facilitate streamline assessment and communication between providers. In this systematic review with meta-analysis we identified and characterized all existing prognostic tools for this population, performed a methodological evaluation of the conducting and reporting of such studies and compared different methods of prognostic tool derivation in terms of discrimination for mortality and functional outcome prediction.MethodsPubMed, ISI, Scopus and CENTRAL were searched up to 15th September 2016, with additional studies identified using reference check. Two reviewers independently extracted data regarding the population studied, process of tool derivation, included predictors and discrimination (c statistic) using a predesignated spreadsheet based in the CHARMS checklist. Disagreements were solved by consensus. C statistics were pooled using robust variance estimation and meta-regression was applied for group comparisons using random effect models.ResultsFifty nine studies were retrieved, including 48,133 patients and reporting on the derivation of 72 prognostic tools. Data on discrimination (c statistic) was available for 53 tools, 38 focusing on mortality and 15 focusing on functional outcome. Discrimination was high for both outcomes, with a pooled c statistic of 0.88 for mortality and 0.87 for functional outcome. Forty three tools were regression based and nine tools were derived using machine learning algorithms, with no differences found between the two methods in terms of discrimination (p = 0.490). Several methodological issues however were identified, relating to handling of missing data, low number of events per variable, insufficient length of follow-up, absence of blinding, infrequent use of internal validation, and underreporting of important model performance measures.ConclusionsPrognostic tools for ICH discriminated well for mortality and functional outcome in derivation studies but methodological issues require confirmation of these findings in validation studies. Logistic regression based risk scores are particularly promising given their good performance and ease of application.

Project description:BackgroundGestational diabetes (GDM) is increasingly common and has significant implications during pregnancy and for the long-term health of the mother and offspring. However, it is a heterogeneous condition with inter-related factors including ethnicity, body mass index and gestational weight gain significantly modifying the absolute risk of complications at an individual level. Predicting the risk of pregnancy complications for an individual woman with GDM presents a useful adjunct to therapeutic decision-making and patient education. Diagnostic prediction models for GDM are prevalent. In contrast, prediction models for risk of complications in those with GDM are relatively novel. This study will systematically review published prognostic prediction models for pregnancy complications in women with GDM, describe their characteristics, compare performance and assess methodological quality and applicability.MethodsStudies will be identified by searching MEDLINE and Embase electronic databases. Title and abstract screening, full-text review and data extraction will be completed independently by two reviewers. The included studies will be systematically assessed for risk of bias and applicability using appropriate tools designed for prediction modelling studies. Extracted data will be tabulated to facilitate qualitative comparison of published prediction models. Quantitative data on predictive performance of these models will be synthesised with meta-analyses if appropriate.DiscussionThis review will identify and summarise all published prognostic prediction models for pregnancy complications in women with GDM. We will compare model performance across different settings and populations with meta-analysis if appropriate. This work will guide subsequent phases in the prognosis research framework: further model development, external validation and model updating, and impact assessment. The ultimate model will estimate the absolute risk of pregnancy complications for women with GDM and will be implemented into routine care as an evidence-based GDM complication risk prediction model. It is anticipated to offer value to women and their clinicians with individualised risk assessment and may assist decision-making. Ultimately, this systematic review is an important step towards a personalised risk-stratified model-of-care for GDM to allow preventative and therapeutic interventions for the maximal benefit to women and their offspring, whilst sparing expense and harm for those at low risk.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO registration number CRD42019115223.