MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6939073523 · doi:10.60692/s3rgb-1ef10

Development and validation of predictive risk models for sight threatening diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes to be applied as triage tools in resource limited settings

2022· article· en· W6939073523 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsType 2 diabetesDiabetic retinopathyTriagePopulationStatisticRetinopathyDiabetes mellitusProportional hazards modelRisk assessment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delayed diagnosis and treatment of sight threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) is a common cause of visual impairment in people with Type 2 diabetes. Therefore, systematic regular retinal screening is recommended, but global coverage of such services is challenging. We aimed to develop and validate predictive models for STDR to identify 'at-risk' population for retinal screening.Models were developed using datasets obtained from general practices in inner London, United Kingdom (UK) on adults with type 2 Diabetes during the period 2007-2017. Three models were developed using Cox regression and model performance was assessed using C statistic, calibration slope and observed to expected ratio measures. Models were externally validated in cohorts from Wales, UK and India.A total of 40,334 people were included in the model development phase of which 1427 (3·54%) people developed STDR. Age, gender, diabetes duration, antidiabetic medication history, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), and history of retinopathy were included as predictors in the Model 1, Model 2 excluded retinopathy status, and Model 3 further excluded HbA1c. All three models attained strong discrimination performance in the model development dataset with C statistics ranging from 0·778 to 0·832, and in the external validation datasets (C statistic 0·685 - 0·823) with calibration slopes closer to 1 following re-calibration of the baseline survival.We have developed new risk prediction equations to identify those at risk of STDR in people with type 2 diabetes in any resource-setting so that they can be screened and treated early. Future testing, and piloting is required before implementation.This study was funded by the GCRF UKRI (MR/P207881/1) and supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information System→Same topicRetinal Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→