These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: External validation of the Finnish diabetes risk score in Venezuela using a national sample: The EVESCAM.
    Author: Nieto-Martínez R, González-Rivas JP, Ugel E, Marulanda MI, Durán M, Mechanick JI, Aschner P.
    Journal: Prim Care Diabetes; 2019 Dec; 13(6):574-582. PubMed ID: 31202539.
    Abstract:
    AIMS: To evaluate the performance of the Latin American Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (LA-FINDRISC) compared with the original O-FINDRISC in general population. To establish the best cut-off to detect unknown type 2 diabetes (uT2D) and prediabetes. METHODS: The EVESCAM was a national population-based, cross-sectional, randomized cluster sampling study, which assessed 3454 adults from July 2014 to January 2017. Those with self-report of diabetes were excluded; a total of 3061 subjects were analyzed. Waist circumference adapted for Latin America was the difference between the LA-FINDRISC and the O-FINDRISC. The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity were calculated. RESULTS: The prevalence of uT2D and prediabetes were 3.3% and 38.5%. The AUC with the LA-FINDRISC vs. the O-FINDRISC were: for uT2D, 0.722 vs. 0.729 in men (p=0.854) and 0.724 vs. 0.732 in women (p=0.896); for prediabetes (impaired fasting glucose [IFG] + impaired glucose tolerance [IGT], 0.590 vs. 0.587 in men (p=0.887) and 0.621 vs. 0.627 in women (p=0.777); for IFG, 0.582 vs. 0.580 in men (p=0.924) and 0.607 vs. 0.617 in women (p=0.690); for IGT, 0.691 vs. 0.692 in men (p=0.971) and 0.672 vs. 0.671 in women (p=0.974). Using the LA-FINDRISC, the best cut-offs to detect uT2D were 9 in men and 10 in women and to detect IGT was 9 in both genders. CONCLUSION: LA-FINDRISC has similar performance than O-FINDRISC in Venezuelan adults and showed a good performance to detect uT2D and IGT, but not IFG. The best cut-offs to detect glucose alterations were established.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]