Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2015
Improving diabetes prevention with benefit based tailored treatment: risk based reanalysis of Diabetes Prevention Program.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers.
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
65 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Validation of a Diabetes Risk Prediction Model With Individualized Preventive Intervention Effects.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2025 · on this mapTrial
- Should Vitamin A Injections to Prevent Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia or Death Be Reserved for High-Risk Infants? Reanalysis of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network Randomized Trial.The Journal of pediatrics · 2021Trial
- Interaction of diabetes genetic risk and successful lifestyle modification in the Diabetes Prevention Programme.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2021Trial
- A clinical diabetes risk prediction model for prediabetic women with prior gestational diabetes.PloS one · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Targeting Pioglitazone Hydrochloride Therapy After Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack According to Pretreatment Risk for Stroke or Myocardial Infarction.JAMA neurology · 2017Trial
- Effect of Using Personalized Estimates of Diabetes Risk During Primary Care Visits for People With Prediabetes.Learning health systems · 2026Article
- Heterogeneous treatment effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors by pretreatment prognosis in randomized controlled trials.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Article
- Heterogeneity of treatment effect? What baseline prognostic factors tell us about immunotherapy benefit.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Article
- 2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2026.Diabetes care · 2026Review
- External validation and application of a machine learning-based model for diabetes progression in prediabetes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Article
- Adding social determinants of health to the equation: Development of a cardiometabolic disease staging model using clinical and social determinants of health to predict type 2 diabetes.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
- Article
- A comment on "Metformin in the Diabetes Prevention Program 3-year trial: The cost-effectiveness that never was".Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
- 2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2025.Diabetes care · 2025Review
- 2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024.Diabetes care · 2024Review
- Impact of individual and environmental factors on dietary or lifestyle interventions to prevent type 2 diabetes development: a systematic review.Communications medicine · 2023Article
- The Effectiveness of Metformin in Diabetes Prevention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2023 · on this mapReview
- Performance metrics for models designed to predict treatment effect.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether some participants in the Diabetes Prevention Program were more or less likely to benefit from metformin or a structured lifestyle modification program.
designPost hoc analysis of the Diabetes Prevention Program, a randomized controlled trial.
settingAmbulatory care patients.
participants3060 people without diabetes but with evidence of impaired glucose metabolism.
interventionIntervention groups received metformin or a lifestyle modification program with the goals of weight loss and physical activity.
main outcome measureDevelopment of diabetes, stratified by the risk of developing diabetes according to a diabetes risk prediction model.
resultsOf the 3081 participants with impaired glucose metabolism at baseline, 655 (21%) progressed to diabetes over a median 2.8 years' follow-up. The diabetes risk model had good discrimination (C statistic=0.73) and calibration. Although the lifestyle intervention provided a sixfold greater absolute risk reduction in the highest risk quarter than in the lowest risk quarter, patients in the lowest risk quarter still received substantial benefit (three year absolute risk reduction 4.9% v 28.3% in highest risk quarter; numbers needed to treat of 20.4 and 3.5, respectively). The benefit of metformin, however, was seen almost entirely in patients in the top quarter of risk of diabetes. No benefit was seen in the lowest risk quarter. Participants in the highest risk quarter averaged a 21.4% three year absolute risk reduction (number needed to treat 4.6).
conclusionsPatients at high risk of diabetes have substantial variation in their likelihood of receiving benefit from diabetes prevention treatments. Using this knowledge could decrease overtreatment and make prevention of diabetes far more efficient, effective, and patient centered, provided that decision making is based on an accurate risk prediction tool.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.