We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, N.I.H., EXTRAMURAL
Utility of existing diabetes risk prediction tools for young black and white adults: Evidence from the Bogalusa Heart Study.
Journal of Diabetes and its Complications 2017 January
AIMS: To evaluate several adult diabetes risk calculation tools for predicting the development of incident diabetes and pre-diabetes in a bi-racial, young adult population.
METHODS: Surveys beginning in young adulthood (baseline age ≥18) and continuing across multiple decades for 2122 participants of the Bogalusa Heart Study were used to test the associations of five well-known adult diabetes risk scores with incident diabetes and pre-diabetes using separate Cox models for each risk score. Racial differences were tested within each model. Predictive utility and discrimination were determined for each risk score using the Net Reclassification Index (NRI) and Harrell's c-statistic.
RESULTS: All risk scores were strongly associated (p<.0001) with incident diabetes and pre-diabetes. The Wilson model indicated greater risk of diabetes for blacks versus whites with equivalent risk scores (HR=1.59; 95% CI 1.11-2.28; p=.01). C-statistics for the diabetes risk models ranged from 0.79 to 0.83. Non-event NRIs indicated high specificity (non-event NRIs: 76%-88%), but poor sensitivity (event NRIs: -23% to -3%).
CONCLUSIONS: Five diabetes risk scores established in middle-aged, racially homogenous adult populations are generally applicable to younger adults with good specificity but poor sensitivity. The addition of race to these models did not result in greater predictive capabilities. A more sensitive risk score to predict diabetes in younger adults is needed.
METHODS: Surveys beginning in young adulthood (baseline age ≥18) and continuing across multiple decades for 2122 participants of the Bogalusa Heart Study were used to test the associations of five well-known adult diabetes risk scores with incident diabetes and pre-diabetes using separate Cox models for each risk score. Racial differences were tested within each model. Predictive utility and discrimination were determined for each risk score using the Net Reclassification Index (NRI) and Harrell's c-statistic.
RESULTS: All risk scores were strongly associated (p<.0001) with incident diabetes and pre-diabetes. The Wilson model indicated greater risk of diabetes for blacks versus whites with equivalent risk scores (HR=1.59; 95% CI 1.11-2.28; p=.01). C-statistics for the diabetes risk models ranged from 0.79 to 0.83. Non-event NRIs indicated high specificity (non-event NRIs: 76%-88%), but poor sensitivity (event NRIs: -23% to -3%).
CONCLUSIONS: Five diabetes risk scores established in middle-aged, racially homogenous adult populations are generally applicable to younger adults with good specificity but poor sensitivity. The addition of race to these models did not result in greater predictive capabilities. A more sensitive risk score to predict diabetes in younger adults is needed.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app