↓ Skip to main content

Discriminatory ability of simple OGTT-based beta cell function indices for prediction of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes: the CODAM study

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetologia, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
Title
Discriminatory ability of simple OGTT-based beta cell function indices for prediction of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes: the CODAM study
Published in
Diabetologia, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00125-016-4165-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Louise J. C. J. den Biggelaar, Simone J. S. Sep, Simone J. P. M. Eussen, Andrea Mari, Ele Ferrannini, Marleen M. J. van Greevenbroek, Carla J. H. van der Kallen, Casper G. Schalkwijk, Coen D. A. Stehouwer, Pieter C. Dagnelie

Abstract

The hyperglycaemic clamp technique and the frequently sampled IVGTT are unsuitable techniques to assess beta cell function (BCF) in large cohorts. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the discriminatory ability of simple OGTT-based BCF indices for prediction of prediabetes (meaning impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance) and type 2 diabetes. Glucose metabolism status was assessed by 2 h 75 g OGTT at baseline (n = 476, mean age 59.2 years, 38.7% women) and after 7 years of follow-up (n = 416) in the Cohort on Diabetes and Atherosclerosis Maastricht (CODAM) study (1999-2009). Baseline plasma glucose, insulin and C-peptide values during OGTTs were used to calculate 21 simple indices of BCF. Disposition indices (BCF index × Matsuda index), to compensate for the prevailing level of insulin resistance, were calculated for the BCF indices with the best discriminatory abilities. The discriminatory ability of the BCF indices was estimated by the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC AUC) with an outcome of incident prediabetes (n = 73) or type 2 diabetes (n = 60 and n = 18 cases, respectively, in individuals who were non-diabetic or had normal glucose metabolism at baseline). For incident prediabetes (n = 73), all ROC AUCs were less than 70%, whereas for incident type 2 diabetes, I30/I0, CP30/CP0, ΔI30/ΔG30, ΔCP30/ΔG30 (where I, CP and G are the plasma concentrations of insulin, C-peptide and glucose, respectively, at the times indicated), and corrected insulin response at 30 min had ROC AUCs over 70%. In at-baseline non-diabetic individuals, disposition indices ΔI30/ΔG30, ΔCP30/ΔG30 and corrected insulin response at 30 min had ROC AUCs of over 80% for incident type 2 diabetes. Moreover, these BCF disposition indices had significantly better discriminatory abilities for incident type 2 diabetes than the Matsuda index alone. BCF indices reflecting early-phase insulin secretion have the best ability to discriminate individuals who will develop prediabetes and type 2 diabetes. Of these, ΔCP30/ΔG30, often referred to as the C-peptidogenic index, performed consistently well.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 20%
Student > Postgraduate 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Professor 5 9%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 39%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Sports and Recreations 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 16 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 March 2017.
All research outputs
#4,505,762
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from Diabetologia
#1,935
of 5,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,420
of 420,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetologia
#46
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,082 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,175 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.