Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

FINDRISC in Latin America: A systematic review of diagnosis and prognosis models

  • Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia
    ,
  • Universidad Católica los Ángeles de Chimbote
    ,
  • Imperial College London
    ,
  • Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú
    ,
Research Output:
Contribution to journal
Review article
Peer-review

Open access

Publication Information

Output type

Research Output:
Contribution to journal
Review article
Peer-review

Original language

English

Article number

e001169

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

BMJ Open Diabetes Research and Care (Volume 8, Issue 1)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 22/04/2020

Publication status

Published - 22/04/2020

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 85084031297
  • PubMed: 32327446

Abstract

This review aimed to assess whether the FINDRISC, a risk score for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), has been externally validated in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). We conducted a systematic review following the CHARMS (CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies) framework. Reports were included if they validated or re-estimated the FINDRISC in population-based samples, health facilities or administrative data. Reports were excluded if they only studied patients or at-risk individuals. The search was conducted in Medline, Embase, Global Health, Scopus and LILACS. Risk of bias was assessed with the PROBAST (Prediction model Risk of Bias ASsessment Tool) tool. From 1582 titles and abstracts, 4 (n=7502) reports were included for qualitative summary. All reports were from South America; there were slightly more women, and the mean age ranged from 29.5 to 49.7 years. Undiagnosed T2DM prevalence ranged from 2.6% to 5.1%. None of the studies conducted an independent external validation of the FINDRISC; conversely, they used the same (or very similar) predictors to fit a new model. None of the studies reported calibration metrics. The area under the receiver operating curve was consistently above 65.0%. All studies had high risk of bias. There has not been any external validation of the FINDRISC model in LAC. Selected reports re-estimated the FINDRISC, although they have several methodological limitations. There is a need for big data to develop - or improve - T2DM diagnostic and prognostic models in LAC. This could benefit T2DM screening and early diagnosis.

Funding Details

Funding The study received funding from Strategic Award, Wellcome Trust-Imperial College Centre for Global Health Research (100693/Z/12/Z), and Imperial College London Wellcome Trust Institutional Strategic Support Fund (Global Health Clinical Research Training Fellowship) (294834/Z/16/Z ISSF ICL). RMC-L is supported by a Wellcome Trust International Training Fellowship (214185/Z/18/Z). The funder had no role in the conception or conduct of this work, neither in the preparation of the results nor in manuscript writing. The authors alone are responsible for the results and opinions in this work.
FundersFunding numbers
Imperial College London Wellcome Trust
294834/Z/16/Z ISSF ICL
Wellcome Trust‐Imperial College Centre for Global Health Research
100693/Z/12/Z
WT
214185/Z/18/Z

Publication metrics

Metrics

Scopus
Citations

PlumX, opens in new tab

Citations
14
Captures
103
Social media
35

Sustainable Development Goals

  • SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well