ArticleDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2024
Updating and calibrating the Real-World Progression In Diabetes (RAPIDS) model in a non-Veterans Affairs population.
Article in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo present the Real-World Progression In Diabetes (RAPIDS) 2.0 Risk Engine, the only simulation model to study the long-term trajectories of outcomes arising from dynamic sequences of glucose-lowering treatments in type 2 diabetes (T2DM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsThe RAPIDS model's risk equations were re-estimated using a Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO)-based regularization of features that spanned baseline data from the last two quarters of current time and interactions with age. These equations were supplemented with estimates for the impact of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor classes of drugs as monotherapies and their combinations with metformin based on newer trial data and comprehensive meta-analyses. The probabilistic RAPIDS 2.0 model was calibrated (N = 25 000) and validated (N = 263 816) using electronic medical records (EMR) data between 2008 and 2021 from a national network of US healthcare organizations.
resultsThe EMR-based cohort had a mean age of 61 years at baseline, with 50% women, 70% non-Hispanic White individuals and 20% non-Hispanic Black individuals, and was followed for 17.5 quarters (range: 3-50). The final RAPIDS 2.0 risk engine accurately predicted the long-term trajectories of all nine biomarkers and nine outcomes in the hold-out validation sample. Similar accuracies in predictions were observed in each of the 14 subgroups studied.
conclusionThe RAPIDS 2.0 model demonstrated valid long-term predictions of outcomes in individuals with T2DM in the United States as a function of dynamic sequences of treatment use patterns. This highlights its potential to project long-term comparative effectiveness between alternative sequences of glucose-lowering treatment uses in the United States.
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.