Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Performance of risk models for predicting 5 year risk of T2D in men

From: Predictive value of serum testosterone for type 2 diabetes risk assessment in men

  Incidence (n/N) AROC (95 % CI) HL Chi-SQ statistic P for HL AIC BIC
Risk prediction models: variables
 Model 1: Variables from AUSDRISK a 147/1655 0.76 (0.72,0.80) 5.29 0.726 895 960
 Model 2: Model 1 with variables from other risk models b 147/1655 0.82 (0.79,0.86) 4.84 0.775 847 987
 Model 3: Model 2 with total testosterone (continuous variable) 147/1655 0.82 (0.79,0.86) 4.45 0.815 844 990
 Model 4: Model 2 with total testosterone (<16 vs ≥16 nmol/L) 147/1655 0.83 (0.79,0.86) 3.97 0.860 846 992
 Model 5: Backwards selection modelc 147/1655 0.82 (0.78,0.85) 5.43 0.711 825 885
Sensitivity analyses       
 Model 6: Model 4 without imputation (15.5 % missing) 126/1399 0.82 (0.78,0.86) NA NA NA NA
 Model 7: Model 4 for NWAHS cohort 62/820 0.79 (0.74,0.85) NA NA NA NA
 Model 8: Model 4 for FAMAS cohort 85/835 0.84 (0.79,0.88) NA NA NA NA
  1. Notes: AROC area under receiver operating characteristic curve (imputation with median AROC reported), HL Hosmer-Lemeshow, AIC Akaike information criterion; Bayesian information criterion, NA not applicable because we are not fitting a new model - just testing the existing model; a Age, ethnicity/country of birth, family history of diabetes, IFG instead of self reported high blood glucose, currently taking blood pressure medications, current smoking status, physical inactivity, waist circumference category; b Pre-diabetes, BMI category, diagnosed cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, high triglycerides, low HDL-C, income category; c Backwards selection model started with all available variables included in Model 4, dropped if p > 0.25, re-entered if p < 0.20 (retained variables were family history of diabetes, currently taking blood pressure medications, current smoking, waist circumference category, pre-diabetes, high blood pressure, low HDL-C low serum testosterone <16 nmol/L); Net changes in AROC were: Model 5 vs Model 2, 0.0093 (95 % CI: −0.0032,0.0218, P = 0.1455)