Prediction Models for Prognosis of Hypoglycemia in Patients with Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING
Yi Wu, Ruxue Li, Yating Zhang, Tianxue Long, Qi Zhang, Mingzi Li
{"title":"Prediction Models for Prognosis of Hypoglycemia in Patients with Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Yi Wu,&nbsp;Ruxue Li,&nbsp;Yating Zhang,&nbsp;Tianxue Long,&nbsp;Qi Zhang,&nbsp;Mingzi Li","doi":"10.1177/10998004221115856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically summarize the reported prediction models for hypoglycemia in patients with diabetes, compare their performance, and evaluate their applicability in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We selected studies according to the PRISMA, appraised studies according to the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST), and extracted and synthesized the data according to the CHARMS. The databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 31 October 2021 using a systematic review approach to capture all eligible studies developing and/or validating a prognostic prediction model for hypoglycemia in patients with diabetes. The risk bias and clinical applicability were assessed using the PROBAST. The meta-analysis of the performance of the prediction models were also conducted. The protocol of this study was recorded in PROSPERO (CRD42022309852).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen studies with 22 models met the eligible criteria. The predictors with the high frequency of occurrence among all models were age, HbA1c, history of hypoglycemia, and insulin use. A meta-analysis of C-statistic was performed for 21 prediction models, and the summary C-statistic and its 95% confidence interval and prediction interval were 0.7699 (0.7299-0.8098), 0.7699 (0.5862-0.9536), respectively. Heterogeneity exists between different hypoglycemia prediction models (τ<sup>2</sup> was 0.00734≠0).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The existing predictive models are not recommended for widespread clinical use. A high-quality hypoglycemia screening tool should be developed in future studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":8997,"journal":{"name":"Biological research for nursing","volume":"25 1","pages":"41-50"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological research for nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10998004221115856","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: To systematically summarize the reported prediction models for hypoglycemia in patients with diabetes, compare their performance, and evaluate their applicability in clinical practice.

Methods: We selected studies according to the PRISMA, appraised studies according to the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST), and extracted and synthesized the data according to the CHARMS. The databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 31 October 2021 using a systematic review approach to capture all eligible studies developing and/or validating a prognostic prediction model for hypoglycemia in patients with diabetes. The risk bias and clinical applicability were assessed using the PROBAST. The meta-analysis of the performance of the prediction models were also conducted. The protocol of this study was recorded in PROSPERO (CRD42022309852).

Results: Sixteen studies with 22 models met the eligible criteria. The predictors with the high frequency of occurrence among all models were age, HbA1c, history of hypoglycemia, and insulin use. A meta-analysis of C-statistic was performed for 21 prediction models, and the summary C-statistic and its 95% confidence interval and prediction interval were 0.7699 (0.7299-0.8098), 0.7699 (0.5862-0.9536), respectively. Heterogeneity exists between different hypoglycemia prediction models (τ2 was 0.00734≠0).

Conclusions: The existing predictive models are not recommended for widespread clinical use. A high-quality hypoglycemia screening tool should be developed in future studies.

糖尿病患者低血糖预后的预测模型:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:系统总结已有的糖尿病患者低血糖预测模型,并对其性能进行比较,评价其在临床中的适用性。方法:根据PRISMA筛选研究,根据PROBAST(预测模型偏倚风险评估工具)评价研究,并根据CHARMS进行数据提取和综合。采用系统评价方法检索PubMed、Web of Science、Embase和Cochrane图书馆的数据库,从建立到2021年10月31日,以捕获所有开发和/或验证糖尿病患者低血糖预后预测模型的符合条件的研究。采用PROBAST评估风险偏倚和临床适用性。并对预测模型的效果进行meta分析。本研究的方案记录在PROSPERO (CRD42022309852)中。结果:16项研究22个模型符合入选标准。所有模型中发生频率较高的预测因子为年龄、HbA1c、低血糖史和胰岛素使用。对21个预测模型进行c统计量荟萃分析,其汇总c统计量及其95%置信区间和预测区间分别为0.7699(0.7299 ~ 0.8098)、0.7699(0.5862 ~ 0.9536)。不同低血糖预测模型之间存在异质性(τ2 = 0.00734≠0)。结论:现有的预测模型不建议广泛应用于临床。在今后的研究中应开发高质量的低血糖筛查工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biological Research For Nursing (BRN) is a peer-reviewed quarterly journal that helps nurse researchers, educators, and practitioners integrate information from many basic disciplines; biology, physiology, chemistry, health policy, business, engineering, education, communication and the social sciences into nursing research, theory and clinical practice. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信