Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
The authors have given priority to those studies and prognostic models that used cohort versus cross-sectional data. This seems reasonable provided the objective is to establish cause-effect relationships for predicting future diabetes incidence. If the objective is more immediate though, identifying those currently affected with hypergycemia using simple non-laboratory inputs, then I think a cross-sectional design may still be sufficient for developing a practical prognostic model. Given the poor sensitivity of hemoglobin A1c for detecting true diabetes(roughly 0.35-0.40) and prediabetes (especially IGT), this cross-sectional approach would also require that hyperglycemia is confirmed with the gold standard OGTT. We have used such an approach in developing a multi-ethnic risk assessment tool called CANRISK, that was recently published in the December issue of Chronic Diseases and Injuries in Canada.
Re: Risk models and scores for type 2 diabetes: systematic review
The authors have given priority to those studies and prognostic models that used cohort versus cross-sectional data. This seems reasonable provided the objective is to establish cause-effect relationships for predicting future diabetes incidence. If the objective is more immediate though, identifying those currently affected with hypergycemia using simple non-laboratory inputs, then I think a cross-sectional design may still be sufficient for developing a practical prognostic model. Given the poor sensitivity of hemoglobin A1c for detecting true diabetes(roughly 0.35-0.40) and prediabetes (especially IGT), this cross-sectional approach would also require that hyperglycemia is confirmed with the gold standard OGTT. We have used such an approach in developing a multi-ethnic risk assessment tool called CANRISK, that was recently published in the December issue of Chronic Diseases and Injuries in Canada.
Competing interests: No competing interests