ArticleMedical care2025
Developing and Validating Models to Predict Suboptimal Early Glycemic Control Among Individuals With Younger Onset Type 2 Diabetes.
Article in Medical care, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveYounger age at the time of type 2 diabetes onset increases individuals' future complication risk. Proactively identifying younger-onset individuals at increased risk of not achieving early glycemic goals can support targeted initial care. DESIGN AND
methodsIndividuals (ages 21-44) newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes were identified and randomly assigned to training (70%) and validation (30%) datasets. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression models were specified to identify key predictors (assessed at diagnosis) of suboptimal glycemic control (HbA1c≥8%) within 1 year after diagnosis using the training dataset. The full model included 48 candidate predictors. We also developed additional more streamlined models using more widely available predictors (transferable model), a smaller number of available predictors (simplified transferable model), and a bivariate model with HbA1c as the sole predictor (HbA1c-only model). Model-based predicted risk scores were used to stratify individuals in the validation dataset.
resultsThe cohort included 10,879 individuals. All of the models, including the HbA1c-only model, performed comparably. All had good discrimination (C-statistics ranging from 0.71 to 0.73) in the validation dataset.
conclusionsWhen predicting the risk of not achieving glycemic goals, the HbA1c-only model had comparable performance to the more complex prediction models. This simple risk stratification requires no computation and could be implemented simply by looking at the diagnosis HbA1c value. This practical approach can be used to identify newly diagnosed younger adults who may need extra attention during the critical early period after diagnosis.
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.