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
. 2016 Nov 21;4(1):e000280.
doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2016-000280. eCollection 2016.

Validation of the German Diabetes Risk Score among the general adult population: findings from the German Health Interview and Examination Surveys

Affiliations

Validation of the German Diabetes Risk Score among the general adult population: findings from the German Health Interview and Examination Surveys

Rebecca Paprott et al. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. .

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the German Diabetes Risk Score (GDRS) among the general adult German population for prediction of incident type 2 diabetes and detection of prevalent undiagnosed diabetes.

Methods: The longitudinal sample for prediction of incident diagnosed type 2 diabetes included 3625 persons who participated both in the examination survey in 1997-1999 and the examination survey in 2008-2011. Incident diagnosed type 2 diabetes was defined as first-time physician diagnosis or antidiabetic medication during 5 years of follow-up excluding potential incident type 1 and gestational diabetes. The cross-sectional sample for detection of prevalent undiagnosed diabetes included 6048 participants without diagnosed diabetes of the examination survey in 2008-2011. Prevalent undiagnosed diabetes was defined as glycated haemoglobin ≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol). We assessed discrimination as area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC (95% CI)) and calibration through calibration plots.

Results: In longitudinal analyses, 82 subjects with incident diagnosed type 2 diabetes were identified after 5 years of follow-up. For prediction of incident diagnosed diabetes, the GDRS yielded an ROC-AUC of 0.87 (0.83 to 0.90). Calibration plots indicated excellent prediction for low diabetes risk and overestimation for intermediate and high diabetes risk. When considering the entire follow-up period of 11.9 years (ROC-AUC: 0.84 (0.82 to 0.86)) and including incident undiagnosed diabetes (ROC-AUC: 0.81 (0.78 to 0.84)), discrimination decreased somewhat. A previously simplified paper version of the GDRS yielded a similar predictive ability (ROC-AUC: 0.86 (0.82 to 0.89)). In cross-sectional analyses, 128 subjects with undiagnosed diabetes were identified. For detection of prevalent undiagnosed diabetes, the ROC-AUC was 0.84 (0.81 to 0.86). Again, the simplified version yielded a similar result (ROC-AUC: 0.83 (0.80 to 0.86)).

Conclusions: The GDRS might be applied for public health monitoring of diabetes risk in the German adult population. Future research needs to evaluate whether the GDRS is useful to improve diabetes risk awareness and prevention among the general population.

Keywords: A1C; Risk Assessment; Risk Factor Modeling; Validation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Participant flow diagram for the ‘GNHIES98—longitudinal sample’ and the ‘DEGS1—cross-sectional sample’. DEGS1, German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults; GDRS, German Diabetes Risk Score; GNHIES98, German National Health Interview and Examination Survey 1998; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Calibration plot by quintiles of predicted 5-year diabetes risk of the comprehensive German Diabetes Risk Score (GDRS) for prediction of incident diagnosed type 2 diabetes in the ‘German National Health Interview and Examination Survey 1998 (GNHIES98)—longitudinal sample’ (N=3625).

References

    1. Noble D, Mathur R, Dent T et al. . Risk models and scores for type 2 diabetes: systematic review. BMJ 2011;343:1–31. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Buijsse B, Simmons RK, Griffin SJ et al. . Risk assessment tools for identifying individuals at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Epidemiol Rev 2011;33:46–62. 10.1093/epirev/mxq019 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Abbasi A, Corpeleijn E, Peelen LM et al. . External validation of the KORA S4/F4 prediction models for the risk of developing type 2 diabetes in older adults: the PREVEND study. Eur J Epidemiol 2012;27:47–52. 10.1007/s10654-011-9648-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Collins GS, Mallett S, Omar O et al. . Developing risk prediction models for type 2 diabetes: a systematic review of methodology and reporting. BMC Med 2011;9:103 10.1186/1741-7015-9-103 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moons KG, Royston P, Vergouwe Y et al. . Prognosis and prognostic research: what, why, and how? BMJ 2009;338:b375 10.1136/bmj.b375 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources