Repository logo
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
Repository logo
  • Communities & Collections
  • All of DSpace
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Schulze B. Matthias"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Validation of prevalent diabetes risk scores based on non-invasively measured predictors in Ghanaian migrant and non-migrant populations – The RODAM study
    (ELSEVIER, 2023) Osei-Yeboah James; Kengne Andre-Pascal; Schulze B. Matthias; Owusu-Dabo Ellis; Bahendeka Silver; Agyemang Charles....et al
    Background: Non-invasive diabetes risk models are a cost-effective tool in large-scale population screening to identify those who need confirmation tests, especially in resource-limited settings. Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the ability of six non-invasive risk models (Cambridge, FINDRISC, Kuwaiti, Omani, Rotterdam, and SUNSET model) to identify screen-detected diabetes (defined by HbA1c) among Gha naian migrants and non-migrants. Study design: A multicentered cross-sectional study. Methods: This analysis included 4843 Ghanaian migrants and non-migrants from the Research on Obesity and Diabetes among African Migrants (RODAM) Study. Model performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC), Hosmer-Lemeshow statistics, and calibration plots. Results: All six models had acceptable discrimination (0.70 ≤ AUC <0.80) for screen-detected diabetes in the overall/combined population. Model performance did not significantly differ except for the Cambridge model, which outperformed Rotterdam and Omani models. Calibration was poor, with a consistent trend toward risk overestimation for screen-detected diabetes, but this was substantially attenuated by recalibration through adjustment of the original model intercept. Conclusion: Though acceptable discrimination was observed, the original models were poorly calibrated among populations of African ancestry. Recalibration of these models among populations of African ancestry is needed before use.

Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology copyright © 2002-2025