Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Published 17 March 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b973
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;338:b973
The QDScore is a useful computer based screening tool
In the linked study (doi:10.1136/bmj.b880), Hippisley-Cox and colleagues present a new score that was developed and validated in a large prospective cohort to estimate the risk of acquiring type 2 diabetes over a 10 year period. This score is unique in that it considers social deprivation and ethnicity in a standardised algorithm.1 The advantage of the QDScore is that it systematically uses electronically recorded medical data available in clinical practice. The algorithm does not require laboratory tests and can be used in clinical settings and for self assessment.
Several risk prediction tools based on the risk factors for type 2 diabetes have been developed.2 Measures of performance of a screening tool should consider accuracy, usefulness, acceptability, practicability, and cost.3 4 The QDScore was highly accurate—predicted risk and observed risk correlated well (97%). Moreover, the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC-AUC) of the QDScore—an important parameter for evaluating the accuracy and discriminatory value of a diagnostic test—exceeded 0.83. Some diabetes risk scores, such as the Finnish Diabetes risk score,5 perform better on this parameter, but differences in study designs and populations make it inappropriate to compare ROC-AUCs.
A strength of this study is that it prospectively analysed 11 million patients registered by 551 general practices. Two key factors affect the interpretation of the results—whether all people with diabetes were excluded at baseline and whether all cases were detected at the end of follow-up. As in normal clinical practice, both depend on the quality of diagnosis by the doctor, the documentation, and the healthcare environment.6 Some cases would have been undiagnosed, but this disadvantage was minimised by the high number of follow-up visits.
The QDScore could be implemented in primary care practices that use electronic medical records to identify patients with an increased risk of diabetes; this might lead to earlier diagnosis and intervention.
One factor, however, restricts the usefulness and acceptability of this score—computer access is essential. This may not be a problem in the developed world, because computers and internet access are widely available, but it may be difficult for people in most developing countries.
Hippisley-Cox and colleagues assessed the risk of diabetes in various ethnic groups living in England and Wales. This is an important and necessary new approach for predicting the risk of diabetes considering the degree of migration in the Western world and the global challenge of the diabetes epidemic.7 Recent evidence indicates that migration to a new society may increase the risk for diabetes and depression.8 Furthermore, Chinese and South Asian immigrants now living in the UK will have different lifestyles to their relatives still living at home. Therefore, in addition to genetic influences, social stress and lifestyle change probably contributed to the striking differences in the QDScore seen between ethnic groups in this study.
Incorporation of the QDScore into practice computer programmes would not increase doctors daily workload, but it would be useful because doctors will not always know the complete medical history of their patients and will not identify all people at increased risk of diabetes. However, accurate and standardised risk stratification is a challenge, and follow-up studies are needed to assess the success of the QDScore.
Authorities such as the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD), the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), and the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) consensus group, as well as two large European funded projects—DE-PLAN9 and IMAGE10—have recommended the use of a risk prediction algorithm in primary care in Europe. The QDScore will be a useful tool to help achieve these goals.
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;338:b973
Peter E H Schwarz, professor for prevention and care of diabetes , Jiang Li, public health researcher, Stefan R Bornstein, chair of medicine
1 Department of Medicine III, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus of the Technical University Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany
peter.schwarz{at}uniklinikum-dresden.de
Provenance and peer review: Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.