ArticlePloS one2025
The additive effect of the estimated glucose disposal rate and a body shape index on cardiovascular disease: A cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe glucose disposal rate (eGDR) and a body shape index (ABSI) are predictors strongly associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and outcomes. However, whether they have additive effects on CVD risk is unknown. This study aimed to investigate whether combined assessment of eGDR and ABSI could improve prediction of CVD risk.
methodsThe current study used data from NHANES from 1999 to 2018 and included 14,237 participants. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the performance of each indicator in predicting CVD. Machine-learning algorithms were applied to screen variables to adjust the model. Finally, the ROC curve, net reclassification improvement (NRI), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), calibration curve and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to evaluate the predictive performance of the combination of eGDR and ABSI.
resultsThe ROC curve showed that eGDR (C-statistics: 0.7255) and ABSI (0.7093) had the highest predictive performance. Among 14,237 participants, multivariate logistic regression showed that lower eGDR (≤6.448) and higher ABSI (≥0.086) significantly increased CVD risk (OR = 11.792, P < 0.05). The model adjusted by machine learning significantly improved CVD risk prediction (Model 3 vs. Model 1, C-statistics: 0.849 vs. 0.753). These findings were also consistent in the NRI (model 3 vs. model 1: 0.108), IDI (0.107), calibration curve, and DCA analyses. Subgroup analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings, with enhanced predictive performance particularly in younger populations.
conclusionThe eGDR and ABSI have potential additive effects on predicting CVD risk, and have excellent predictive performance, which can evaluate cardiovascular risk more comprehensively.
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.