Comparing non-invasive diabetes risk scores for detecting patients in clinical practice: a cross-sectional validation study

Abstract

Background: Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, thus early identification is of paramount importance. A high proportion of T2DM cases are undiagnosed highlighting the importance of effective detection methods such as non-invasive diabetes risk scores (DRSs). Thus far, no DRS has been validated in an Irish population. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the ability of nine DRSs to detect T2DM cases in an Irish population. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of 1,990 men and women aged 46–73 years. Data on DRS components were collected from questionnaires and clinical examinations. T2DM was determined according to a fasting plasma glucose level ≥7.0 mmol/l or a glycated haemoglobin A1c level ≥6.5% (≥48 mmol/mol). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis assessed the ability of DRSs and their components to discriminate T2DM cases. Results: Among the examined scores, area under the curve (AUC) values ranged from 0.71–0.78, with the Cambridge Diabetes Risk Score (AUC=0.78, 95% CI: 0.75–0.82), Leicester Diabetes Risk Score (AUC=0.78, 95% CI: 0.75–0.82), Rotterdam Predictive Model 2 (AUC=0.78, 95% CI: 0.74–0.82) and the U.S. Diabetes Risk Score (AUC=0.78, 95% CI: 0.74–0.81) demonstrating the largest AUC values as continuous variables and at optimal cut-offs. Regarding individual DRS components, anthropometric measures displayed the largest AUC values. Conclusions: The best performing DRSs were broadly similar in terms of their components; all incorporated variables for age, sex, BMI, hypertension and family diabetes history. The Cambridge Diabetes Risk Score, had the largest AUC value at an optimal cut-off, can be easily accessed online for use in a clinical setting and may be the most appropriate and cost-effective method for case-finding in an Irish population.