Population-based diagnostic prediction scores to identify undiagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus in low- and middle-income countries in South and East Asia and the Pacific: A systematic Review and meta-analysis
Fadila Wirawan, Areej Almutairi, Regina Prigge, Sarah Wild
{"title":"Population-based diagnostic prediction scores to identify undiagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus in low- and middle-income countries in South and East Asia and the Pacific: A systematic Review and meta-analysis","authors":"Fadila Wirawan, Areej Almutairi, Regina Prigge, Sarah Wild","doi":"10.1016/j.dsx.2026.103483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Undiagnosed diabetes prevalence is high in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in South Asia, East Asia & Pacific (SAEA&P). Non-invasive scores may be helpful for population screening to identify people for blood glucose testing.</div></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><div>To assess population-based diagnostic prediction scores’ performance to identify undiagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) in adults in SAEA&P LMICs.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, OVID, and Cochrane Library in July 2025, followed by hand searches. We included studies that developed or validated T2D diagnostic prediction scores in adult general populations without known T2D from LMICs in SAEA&P. A bivariate diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis was performed for scores with multiple validations across different countries in studies without a high risk of bias. Discriminative performance was measured based on the Area Under Curve (AUC). This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024584501).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified 9651 articles and assessed 85 full-text articles for eligibility. Thirty articles were included in the review: eleven that developed and 19 that validated population-based T2D diagnostic prediction scores across eight countries. The meta-analyses of Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) variations and of the Indian risk score show fair pooled discriminative performance for both scores (AUC = 0.735 and AUC = 0.704, respectively). Scores adapted from those developed in Europe had higher specificity but lower sensitivity than those developed in SAEA&P. No articles were considered to have a low risk of bias.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Some T2D diagnostic prediction scores could be useful in SAEA&P LMICs; however, robust external validation in local settings is required before implementation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48252,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome-Clinical Research & Reviews","volume":"20 9","pages":"Article 103483"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome-Clinical Research & Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871402126001104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/9/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
Undiagnosed diabetes prevalence is high in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in South Asia, East Asia & Pacific (SAEA&P). Non-invasive scores may be helpful for population screening to identify people for blood glucose testing.
Aims
To assess population-based diagnostic prediction scores’ performance to identify undiagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) in adults in SAEA&P LMICs.
Methods
A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, OVID, and Cochrane Library in July 2025, followed by hand searches. We included studies that developed or validated T2D diagnostic prediction scores in adult general populations without known T2D from LMICs in SAEA&P. A bivariate diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis was performed for scores with multiple validations across different countries in studies without a high risk of bias. Discriminative performance was measured based on the Area Under Curve (AUC). This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024584501).
Results
We identified 9651 articles and assessed 85 full-text articles for eligibility. Thirty articles were included in the review: eleven that developed and 19 that validated population-based T2D diagnostic prediction scores across eight countries. The meta-analyses of Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) variations and of the Indian risk score show fair pooled discriminative performance for both scores (AUC = 0.735 and AUC = 0.704, respectively). Scores adapted from those developed in Europe had higher specificity but lower sensitivity than those developed in SAEA&P. No articles were considered to have a low risk of bias.
Conclusions
Some T2D diagnostic prediction scores could be useful in SAEA&P LMICs; however, robust external validation in local settings is required before implementation.
期刊介绍:
Diabetes and Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research and Reviews is the official journal of DiabetesIndia. It aims to provide a global platform for healthcare professionals, diabetes educators, and other stakeholders to submit their research on diabetes care.
Types of Publications:
Diabetes and Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research and Reviews publishes peer-reviewed original articles, reviews, short communications, case reports, letters to the Editor, and expert comments. Reviews and mini-reviews are particularly welcomed for areas within endocrinology undergoing rapid changes.