The accuracy of polyuria, polydipsia, polyphagia, and Indian Diabetes Risk Score in adults screened for diabetes mellitus type-II

Q4 Medicine
S. Pawar, Poonam Thakur, B. Radhe, H. Jadhav, Vivek Behere, Vikrant Pagar
{"title":"The accuracy of polyuria, polydipsia, polyphagia, and Indian Diabetes Risk Score in adults screened for diabetes mellitus type-II","authors":"S. Pawar, Poonam Thakur, B. Radhe, H. Jadhav, Vivek Behere, Vikrant Pagar","doi":"10.4103/0975-2870.206569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: The World Health Organization report suggests that over 19% of the world's diabetic population currently resides in India. Unfortunately, >50% of the diabetics in India are unaware about their diabetic status. In the poor income country like India, it is essential to use cost-effective methods for screening for diabetes, and traditionally using three classical symptoms and Indian Diabetes Risk Score (IDRS) tool is helpful but, data regarding their diagnostic accuracy is very less. Objective: (1) To assess the diagnostic accuracy of polyuria, polydipsia, polyphagia, and IDRS for detecting diabetes. Settings and Design: Six hundred and seventy-seven adult individuals >20 years of age were screened for diabetes and assessed polyuria, polydipsia, polyphagia, and IDRS score. All were subjected for postprandial blood glucose level. Subjects and Methods: For diagnostic accuracy sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, likelihood ratios (LRs, for positive and negative tests), and accuracy was calculated for each symptom. Similarly, by receiver operative curve (ROC) curve analysis, we carried out sensitivity and specificity of IDRS. Results: There was statistically significant association between these three classical symptoms and diabetes status of individuals. When present, all these three symptoms carried 7.34% sensitivity and 98.42% specificity with positive predictive value 47.06% and NPV 84.70%, LR+4.36, LR−0.94 with accuracy of 85%. The optimum cutoff value of IDRS score was >50, which carried sensitivity 73%, specificity 58.7%, and area under curve for ROC was 68% (P < 0.001). Conclusions: This study has shown highest specificity for these three classical symptoms in diagnosing diabetes, but these symptoms were insensitive to detect all diabetic subjects.","PeriodicalId":36033,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Dr. D.Y. Patil University","volume":"10 1","pages":"263-267"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Dr. D.Y. Patil University","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-2870.206569","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Context: The World Health Organization report suggests that over 19% of the world's diabetic population currently resides in India. Unfortunately, >50% of the diabetics in India are unaware about their diabetic status. In the poor income country like India, it is essential to use cost-effective methods for screening for diabetes, and traditionally using three classical symptoms and Indian Diabetes Risk Score (IDRS) tool is helpful but, data regarding their diagnostic accuracy is very less. Objective: (1) To assess the diagnostic accuracy of polyuria, polydipsia, polyphagia, and IDRS for detecting diabetes. Settings and Design: Six hundred and seventy-seven adult individuals >20 years of age were screened for diabetes and assessed polyuria, polydipsia, polyphagia, and IDRS score. All were subjected for postprandial blood glucose level. Subjects and Methods: For diagnostic accuracy sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, likelihood ratios (LRs, for positive and negative tests), and accuracy was calculated for each symptom. Similarly, by receiver operative curve (ROC) curve analysis, we carried out sensitivity and specificity of IDRS. Results: There was statistically significant association between these three classical symptoms and diabetes status of individuals. When present, all these three symptoms carried 7.34% sensitivity and 98.42% specificity with positive predictive value 47.06% and NPV 84.70%, LR+4.36, LR−0.94 with accuracy of 85%. The optimum cutoff value of IDRS score was >50, which carried sensitivity 73%, specificity 58.7%, and area under curve for ROC was 68% (P < 0.001). Conclusions: This study has shown highest specificity for these three classical symptoms in diagnosing diabetes, but these symptoms were insensitive to detect all diabetic subjects.
成人II型糖尿病筛查中多尿、多饮、多食和印度糖尿病风险评分的准确性
背景:世界卫生组织的报告表明,目前世界糖尿病人口的19%以上居住在印度。不幸的是,印度50%以上的糖尿病患者不知道自己的糖尿病状况。在印度这样的低收入国家,使用具有成本效益的方法筛查糖尿病至关重要,传统上使用三种经典症状和印度糖尿病风险评分(IDRS)工具是有帮助的,但有关其诊断准确性的数据非常少。目的:(1)评价多尿、多饮、多食和IDRS对糖尿病的诊断准确性。设置和设计:对677名>20岁的成年个体进行糖尿病筛查,并评估多尿、多饮、多食和IDRS评分。所有人都接受了餐后血糖水平测试。受试者和方法:计算每种症状的诊断准确性、敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值、似然比(阳性和阴性检测的LR)和准确性。同样,通过受试者操作曲线(ROC)曲线分析,我们进行了IDRS的敏感性和特异性。结果:这三种典型症状与个体的糖尿病状况之间存在统计学上显著的相关性。当存在时,所有这三种症状的敏感性为7.34%,特异性为98.42%,阳性预测值为47.06%,NPV为84.70%,LR+4.36,LR-0.94,准确率为85%。IDRS评分的最佳临界值>50,ROC的敏感性为73%,特异性为58.7%,曲线下面积为68%(P<0.001)。
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
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
31 weeks
×
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