ArticleCardiovascular diabetology2024
External validation and calibration of risk equations for prediction of diabetic kidney diseases among patients with type 2 diabetes in Taiwan.
Article in Cardiovascular diabetology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundMost existing risk equations for predicting/stratifying individual diabetic kidney disease (DKD) risks were developed using relatively dated data from selective and homogeneous trial populations comprising predominately Caucasian type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients. We seek to adapt risk equations for prediction of DKD progression (microalbuminuria, macroalbuminuria, and renal failure) using empiric data from a real-world population with T2D in Taiwan.
methodsRisk equations from three well-known simulation models: UKPDS-OM2, RECODe, and CHIME models, were adapted. Discrimination and calibration were determined using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), a calibration plot (slope and intercept), and the Greenwood-Nam-D'Agostino (GND) test. Recalibration was performed for unsatisfactory calibration (p-value of GND test < 0.05) by adjusting the baseline hazards of risk equations to address risk variations among patients.
resultsThe RECODe equations for microalbuminuria and macroalbuminuria showed moderate discrimination (AUROC: 0.62 and 0.76) but underestimated the event risks (calibration slope > 1). The CHIME equation had the best discrimination for renal failure (AUROCs from CHIME, UKPDS-OM2 and RECODe: 0.77, 0.60 and 0.64, respectively). All three equations overestimated renal failure risk (calibration slope < 1). After rigorous updating, the calibration slope/intercept of the recalibrated RECODe for predicting microalbuminuria (0.87/0.0459) and macroalbuminuria (1.10/0.0004) risks as well as the recalibrated CHIME equation for predicting renal failure risk (0.95/-0.0014) were improved.
conclusionsRisk equations for prediction of DKD progression in real-world Taiwanese T2D patients were established, which can be incorporated into a multi-state simulation model to project and differentiate individual DKD risks for supporting timely interventions and health economic research.
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.