Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35992128›Full record

Trial reportFrontiers in endocrinology2022

A Bayesian network model of new-onset diabetes in older Chinese: The Guangzhou biobank cohort study.

Ying Wang, Wei Sen Zhang, Yuan Tao Hao, Chao Qiang Jiang, Ya Li Jin, Kar Keung Cheng, Tai Hing Lam, Lin Xu

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Ying WangSchool of Public Health, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Wei Sen ZhangMolecular Epidemiology Research Centre, Guangzhou Twelfth People's Hospital, Guangzhou, China.
Yuan Tao HaoSchool of Public Health, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Chao Qiang JiangMolecular Epidemiology Research Centre, Guangzhou Twelfth People's Hospital, Guangzhou, China.
Ya Li JinMolecular Epidemiology Research Centre, Guangzhou Twelfth People's Hospital, Guangzhou, China.
Kar Keung ChengInstitute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Tai Hing LamMolecular Epidemiology Research Centre, Guangzhou Twelfth People's Hospital, Guangzhou, China.
Lin XuSchool of Public Health, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Twelfth Guangzhou City People's Hospital · CNSun Yat-sen University · CNUniversity of Hong Kong · HKUniversity of Birmingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Existing diabetes risk prediction models based on regression were limited in dealing with collinearity and complex interactions. Bayesian network (BN) model that considers interactions may provide additional information to predict risk and infer causation. Methods: BN model was constructed for new-onset diabetes using prospective data of 15,934 participants without diabetes at baseline [73% women; mean (standard deviation) age = 61.0 (6.9) years]. Participants were randomly assigned to a training (n = 12,748) set and a validation (n = 3,186) set. Model performances were assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: During an average follow-up of 4.1 (interquartile range = 3.3-4.5) years, 1,302 (8.17%) participants developed diabetes. The constructed BN model showed the associations (direct, indirect, or no) among 24 risk factors, and only hypertension, impaired fasting glucose (IFG; fasting glucose of 5.6-6.9 mmol/L), and greater waist circumference (WC) were directly associated with new-onset diabetes. The risk prediction model showed that the post-test probability of developing diabetes in participants with hypertension, IFG, and greater WC was 27.5%, with AUC of 0.746 [95% confidence interval CI) = 0.732-0.760], sensitivity of 0.727 (95% CI = 0.703-0.752), and specificity of 0.660 (95% CI = 0.652-0.667). This prediction model appeared to perform better than a logistic regression model using the same three predictors (AUC = 0.734, 95% CI = 0.703-0.764, sensitivity = 0.604, and specificity = 0.745). Conclusions: We have first reported a BN model in predicting new-onset diabetes with the smallest number of factors among existing models in the literature. BN yielded a more comprehensive figure showing graphically the inter-relations for multiple factors with diabetes than existing regression models.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusHypertensionAgedBayes TheoremBiological Specimen BanksChinaCohort StudiesFemaleGlucoseHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesGlucoseBayesian networkcausal modeldiabetesdirected acyclic graphrisk factors

Identifiers

PMID35992128
PMCPMC9382298
OpenAlexW4289516759

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.