ArticlePloS one2022
Translation and performance of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score for detecting undiagnosed diabetes and dysglycaemia in the Indonesian population.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) in a Central-European Population for the Prediction of Cumulative Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes Over 8-Years-Follow-Up of the Budakalász Health Examination Survey (BHES).Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews · 2025Article
- FINDRISC modified for Cuba as a tool for the detection of prediabetes and undiagnosed diabetes in cuban population.Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica · 2025Article
- Identification of mitochondria-related feature genes for predicting type 2 diabetes mellitus using machine learning methods.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of community-based type 2 diabetes prevention and control in Indonesia: a health economics modelling study.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Adaptation of finnish diabetes risk score for screening undiagnosed diabetes and hyperglycemia in Chinese adults.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Can social media encourage diabetes self-screenings? A randomized controlled trial with Indonesian Facebook users.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Effective questionnaire-based prediction models for type 2 diabetes across several ethnicities: a model development and validation study.EClinicalMedicine · 2023Article
- ModAsian FINDRISC as a Screening Tool for People with Undiagnosed Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Vietnam: A Community-Based Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
- Impaired health-related quality of life due to elevated risk of developing diabetes: A cross-sectional study in Indonesia.PloS one · 2023Article
- Large scale application of the Finnish diabetes risk score in Latin American and Caribbean populations: a descriptive study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A diabetes risk score cannot directly be translated and applied in different populations, and its performance should be evaluated in the target population. This study aimed to translate the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) instrument and compare its performance with the modified version for detecting undiagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and dysglycaemia among the Indonesian adult population. Forward and backward translations were performed and followed by cultural adaptation. In total, 1,403 participants were recruited. The FINDRISC-Bahasa Indonesia (FINDRISC-BI) was scored according to the original FINDRISC instrument, while a Modified FINDRISC-BI was analyzed using a specific body mass index and waist circumference classification for Indonesians. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, and the optimal cut-offs of both instruments were estimated. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for detecting undiagnosed T2DM was 0.73 (0.67-0.78) for the FINDRISC-BI with an optimal cut-off score of ≥9 (sensitivity = 63.0%; specificity = 67.3%) and 0.72 (0.67-0.78) for the Modified FINDRISC-BI with an optimal cut-off score of ≥11 (sensitivity = 59.8%; specificity = 74.9%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for detecting dysglycaemia was 0.72 (0.69-0.75) for the FINDRISC-BI instrument with an optimal cut-off score of ≥8 (sensitivity = 66.4%; specificity = 67.0%), and 0.72 (0.69-0.75) for the Modified FINDRISC-BI instrument with an optimal cut-off score ≥9 (sensitivity = 63.8%; specificity = 67.6%). The Indonesian version of the FINDRISC instrument has acceptable diagnostic accuracy for screening people with undiagnosed T2DM or dysglycaemia in Indonesia. Modifying the body mass index and waist circumference classifications in the Modified FINDRISC-BI results in a similar diagnostic accuracy; however, the Modified FINDRISC-BI has a higher optimal cut-off point than the FINDRISC-BI. People with an above optimal cut-off score are suggested to take a further blood glucose test.
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.