File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

Supplementary

Conference Paper: External validation of cardiovascular risk models in 23,685 adults with diabetes

TitleExternal validation of cardiovascular risk models in 23,685 adults with diabetes
Authors
Issue Date4-Dec-2023
Abstract

Background
There is an abundance of risk models for predicting cardiovascular outcomes in people with type 2
diabetes. Independent external validations of cardiovascular disease risk prediction models are crucial
for assessing their applicability. We externally validated risk prediction models developed for people
with diabetes in a large population-based prospective cohort (UK Biobank).
Methods
We externally validated 17 cardiovascular risk scores (from seven risk prediction models: Chang et al,
Framingham, HKU-SG, Li et al, RECODe, SCORE, UKPDS OM2) identified from systematic reviews
using UK Biobank (n= 23,685; 40-71 years old; 63.5% male) data from 2006 to 2021. We evaluated
model performance by assessing discrimination and calibration for mortality, cardiovascular mortality,
congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and ischemic heart disease.
Results
Over a total of 269,430 person-years of follow-up (median: 11.89 years), the models showed low-tomoderate discrimination performance on external validation (c-indices ranging from 0.58-0.71). Most
models had low calibration with overprediction of the observed risk. RECODe outperformed other
models across five comparable endpoints for discrimination: all-cause mortality (c-index=0.67, [95% CI:
0.65-0.69]), cardiovascular mortality (0.70, [0.67-0.72]), congestive heart failure (0.71, [0.69-0.72]),
myocardial infarction (0.67, [0.65-0.68]), and stroke (0.65, [0.62-0.68]; and for calibration (except for all cause mortality). Models performed better for younger participants and somewhat better for non-white
ethnicities. Models developed from non-Western datasets had lower performance in our UK-based
validation set.
Conclusions
The RECODe equations had better risk estimations in this predominantly white European population.
Further validation is needed on non-Western populations to assess generalizability for other
populations.


Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/337184

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorZhang, Yikun-
dc.contributor.authorNg, Carmen Stephanie-
dc.contributor.authorQuan, Jianchao-
dc.contributor.authorJiong, Ong Xin-
dc.contributor.authorTang, Yui Chit-
dc.contributor.authorWong, Cheuk Tung-
dc.contributor.authorTang, Shiqi -
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-11T10:18:45Z-
dc.date.available2024-03-11T10:18:45Z-
dc.date.issued2023-12-04-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/337184-
dc.description.abstract<p><b>Background</b><br>There is an abundance of risk models for predicting cardiovascular outcomes in people with type 2<br>diabetes. Independent external validations of cardiovascular disease risk prediction models are crucial<br>for assessing their applicability. We externally validated risk prediction models developed for people<br>with diabetes in a large population-based prospective cohort (UK Biobank).<br><b>Methods</b><br>We externally validated 17 cardiovascular risk scores (from seven risk prediction models: Chang et al,<br>Framingham, HKU-SG, Li et al, RECODe, SCORE, UKPDS OM2) identified from systematic reviews<br>using UK Biobank (n= 23,685; 40-71 years old; 63.5% male) data from 2006 to 2021. We evaluated<br>model performance by assessing discrimination and calibration for mortality, cardiovascular mortality,<br>congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and ischemic heart disease.<br><b>Results</b><br>Over a total of 269,430 person-years of follow-up (median: 11.89 years), the models showed low-tomoderate discrimination performance on external validation (c-indices ranging from 0.58-0.71). Most<br>models had low calibration with overprediction of the observed risk. RECODe outperformed other<br>models across five comparable endpoints for discrimination: all-cause mortality (c-index=0.67, [95% CI:<br>0.65-0.69]), cardiovascular mortality (0.70, [0.67-0.72]), congestive heart failure (0.71, [0.69-0.72]),<br>myocardial infarction (0.67, [0.65-0.68]), and stroke (0.65, [0.62-0.68]; and for calibration (except for all cause mortality). Models performed better for younger participants and somewhat better for non-white<br>ethnicities. Models developed from non-Western datasets had lower performance in our UK-based<br>validation set.<br><b>Conclusions</b><br>The RECODe equations had better risk estimations in this predominantly white European population.<br>Further validation is needed on non-Western populations to assess generalizability for other<br>populations.</p>-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofMt Hood Asia 2023 Diabetes Challenge & Society for Medical Decision Making Asia Conference (03/12/2023-05/12/2023, Kuala Lumpur)-
dc.titleExternal validation of cardiovascular risk models in 23,685 adults with diabetes-
dc.typeConference_Paper-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats