Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Dec 1;151(11):775-83.
doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-11-200912010-00005.

Development and validation of a patient self-assessment score for diabetes risk

Affiliations

Development and validation of a patient self-assessment score for diabetes risk

Heejung Bang et al. Ann Intern Med. .

Abstract

Background: National guidelines disagree on who should be screened for undiagnosed diabetes. No existing diabetes risk score is highly generalizable or widely followed.

Objective: To develop a new diabetes screening score and compare it with other available screening instruments (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Diabetes Association, and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines; 2 American Diabetes Association risk questionnaires; and the Rotterdam model).

Design: Cross-sectional data.

Setting: NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) 1999 to 2004 for model development and 2005 to 2006, plus a combined cohort of 2 community studies, ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities) Study and CHS (Cardiovascular Health Study), for validation.

Participants: U.S. adults aged 20 years or older.

Measurements: A risk-scoring algorithm for undiagnosed diabetes, defined as fasting plasma glucose level of 7.0 mmol/L (126 mg/dL) or greater without known diabetes, was developed in the development data set. Logistic regression was used to determine which participant characteristics were independently associated with undiagnosed diabetes. The new algorithm and other methods were evaluated by standard diagnostic and feasibility measures.

Results: Age, sex, family history of diabetes, history of hypertension, obesity, and physical activity were associated with undiagnosed diabetes. In NHANES (ARIC/CHS), the cut-point of 5 or more points selected 35% (40%) of persons for diabetes screening and yielded a sensitivity of 79% (72%), specificity of 67% (62%), positive predictive value of 10% (10%), and positive likelihood ratio of 2.39 (1.89). In contrast, the comparison scores yielded a sensitivity of 44% to 100%, specificity of 10% to 73%, positive predictive value of 5% to 8%, and positive likelihood ratio of 1.11 to 1.98.

Limitation: Data during pregnancy were not available.

Conclusion: This easy-to-implement diabetes screening score seems to demonstrate improvements over existing methods. Studies are needed to evaluate it in diverse populations in real-world settings.

Primary funding source: Clinical and Translational Science Center at Weill Cornell Medical College.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Potential Conflicts of Interest: Dr. Teutsch is a former employee and an option holder in Merck and Co. Inc.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. The estimated prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes by screening score
NHANES 1999–2006 has N=6,898 and ARIC/CHS has N=19,728. Proportions of individuals for scores of (−1,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) correspond to (1%,4%,10%,14%,16%,17%,16%,13%,7%,2%,0.1%) in NHANES and (2%,5%,11%,19%,24%,22%,13%,4%,0.4%,0.01%) in ARIC/CHS. ARIC = Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities; CHS = Cardiovascular Health Study; NHANES = National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Label of Y-axis: Prevalence, % Label of X-axis: Total Screening Score
Figure 2
Figure 2. Self-assessment screening score for undiagnosed diabetes or pre-diabetes

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Amos AF, McCarty DJ, Zimmet P. The rising global burden of diabetes and its complications: estimates and projections to the year 2010. Diabetic Medicine. 1997;14(Suppl 5)(5):S1–S85. - PubMed
    1. Cowie CC, Rust KF, Ford ES, et al. Full accounting of diabetes and pre-diabetes in the U. S population in 1988–1994 and 2005–2006. Diabetes Care. 2009;32(2):287–294. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Prevalence of diabetes and impaired fasting glucose in adults -- United States: 1999–2000. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2003;52(35):833–837. - PubMed
    1. Heikes KE, Eddy DM, Arondekar B, Schlessinger L. Diabetes Risk Calculator: a simple tool for detecting undiagnosed diabetes and pre-diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(5):1040–1045. - PubMed
    1. Goyder EC, McNally PG, Drucquer M, Spiers N, Botha JL. Shifting of care for diabetes from secondary to primary care: 1990–5: review of general practices. BMJ. 1998;316:1505–1506. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types