Literature DB >> 15324514

Validation of the CORE Diabetes Model against epidemiological and clinical studies.

Andrew J Palmer1, Stéphane Roze, William J Valentine, Michael E Minshall, Volker Foos, Francesco M Lurati, Morten Lammert, Giatgen A Spinas.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the validity of the CORE Diabetes Model by comparing results from model simulations with observed outcomes from published epidemiological and clinical studies in type 1 and type 2 diabetes.
METHODS: A total of 66 second- (internal) and third- (external) order validation analyses were performed across a range of complications and outcomes simulated by the CORE Diabetes Model (amputation, cataract, hypoglycaemia, ketoacidosis, macular oedema, myocardial infarction, nephropathy, neuropathy, retinopathy, stroke and mortality). Published studies were reproduced in the model by recreating cohorts in terms of demographics, baseline risk factors and complications, treatment patterns and patient management strategies, and simulating the progress of the cohort to an equivalent time horizon.
RESULTS: Correlation analysis on results from 66 validation simulations produced an R2 value of 0.9224 (perfect fit = 1). A correlation plot of published study data versus values simulated by the CORE Diabetes Model had a trend line with a gradient of 1.0187 (perfect fit = 1). Validation analyses in type 1 and type 2 diabetes were associated with R2 values of 0.9778 and 0.8861 respectively. Correlation of second-order validation analyses (model predictions versus observed outcomes in studies used to construct the model) produced an R2 value of 0.9574, and the value for third-order analyses (model predictions versus observed outcomes in studies not used to construct the model) was 0.9023.
CONCLUSIONS: The CORE Diabetes Model provides an accurate representation of patient outcomes when compared to 66 studies of diabetes and its complications. Model flexibility ensures it can be used to compare diabetes management strategies in different cohorts across a variety of clinical settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15324514     DOI: 10.1185/030079904X2006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin        ISSN: 0300-7995            Impact factor:   2.580


  66 in total

1.  Screening for and treatment of osteoporosis: construction and validation of a state-transition microsimulation cost-effectiveness model.

Authors:  L Si; T M Winzenberg; Q Jiang; A J Palmer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Cost Effectiveness of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) Inhibitors, Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists, and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 (DPP-4) Inhibitors: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Dongzhe Hong; Lei Si; Minghuan Jiang; Hui Shao; Wai-Kit Ming; Yingnan Zhao; Yan Li; Lizheng Shi
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Projection of osteoporosis-related fractures and costs in China: 2010-2050.

Authors:  L Si; T M Winzenberg; Q Jiang; M Chen; A J Palmer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  3-Month Results from Denmark within the Globally Prospective and Observational Study to Evaluate Insulin Detemir Treatment in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes: The PREDICTIVE Study.

Authors:  Kjeld Hermansen; Per Lund; Kurt Clemmensen; Leif Breum; Marianne Kleis Moller; Anne Mette Rosenfalck; Erik Christiansen
Journal:  Rev Diabet Stud       Date:  2007-08-10

5.  Complication reducing effect of the information technology-based diabetes management system on subjects with type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Jae-Hyoung Cho; Jin-Hee Lee; Jeong-Ah Oh; Mi-Ja Kang; Yoon-Hee Choi; Hyuk-Sang Kwon; Sang-Ah Chang; Bong-Yun Cha; Ho-Young Son; Kun-Ho Yoon
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2008-01

6.  Cost-effectiveness of diabetes case management for low-income populations.

Authors:  Todd P Gilmer; Stéphane Roze; William J Valentine; Katrina Emy-Albrecht; Joshua A Ray; David Cobden; Lars Nicklasson; Athena Philis-Tsimikas; Andrew J Palmer
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.402

7.  A cost-effectiveness analysis to illustrate the impact of cost definitions on results, interpretations and comparability of pharmacoeconomic studies in the US.

Authors:  Sandra L Tunis
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus multiple daily injections of insulin: economic comparison in adult and adolescent type 1 diabetes mellitus in Australia.

Authors:  Neale Cohen; Michael E Minshall; Lyn Sharon-Nash; Katerina Zakrzewska; William J Valentine; Andrew J Palmer
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Cost-effectiveness of pioglitazone in type 2 diabetes patients with a history of macrovascular disease: a German perspective.

Authors:  Werner A Scherbaum; Gordon Goodall; Katrina M Erny-Albrecht; Massimo Massi-Benedetti; Erland Erdmann; William J Valentine
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2009-05-05

10.  The consequences of delaying insulin initiation in UK type 2 diabetes patients failing oral hyperglycaemic agents: a modelling study.

Authors:  Gordon Goodall; Eric M Sarpong; Clarice Hayes; William J Valentine
Journal:  BMC Endocr Disord       Date:  2009-10-05       Impact factor: 2.763

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.