Development and Validation of a Simple Risk Score for Undiagnosed Type 2 Diabetes in a Resource-Constrained Setting
Table 4
Performance of different diabetes risk scores compared to Peruvian diabetes risk score using the CRONICAS study (validation sample).
Method (proposed cutoff)
# of variables
AUC
Sensitivity
Specificity
PPV
NPV
LR+
LR−
Brazilian risk score (≥18)
3
0.65
66.7%
61.9%
4.9%
98.4%
1.75
0.54
Qingdao risk score (≥17 and ≥14)
4
0.58
83.3%
33.3%
3.6%
98.5%
1.25
0.50
Indian risk score (≥21)
5
0.54
94.0%
15.5%
3.1%
98.9%
1.11
0.39
Kuwaiti risk score (≥32)
4
0.62
45.2%
78.4%
5.8%
98.0%
2.09
0.70
Patient self-assessment score (≥5)
6
0.64
61.4%
66.8%
5.1%
98.3%
1.85
0.58
Rotterdam risk score (≥36)
6
0.55
94.0%
16.8%
3.2%
99.0%
1.13
0.35
Peruvian risk score (≥2)
3
0.68
70.2%
58.9%
4.8%
98.5%
1.71
0.51
AUC: area under the ROC curve; PPV: positive predictive value; NPV: negative predictive value; LR+: positive likelihood ratio; LR−: negative likelihood ratio. Different cutoffs for males (≥17) and females (≥14).
