Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2019 Mar 3. doi: 10.1111/dom.13684. [Epub ahead of print]

Decision models of prediabetes populations: A systematic review.

Author information

1
Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
2
Unit of Clinical Epidemiology and CPO Piemonte, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, Italy.
3
Groningen University, UMCG, Department of Epidemiology, Groningen, The Netherlands.
4
RIVM, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.

Abstract

AIMS:

With evidence supporting the use of preventive interventions for prediabetes populations and the use of novel biomarkers to stratify the risk of progression, there is a need to evaluate their cost-effectiveness across jurisdictions. Our aim is to summarize and assess the quality and validity of decision models and model-based economic evaluations of populations with prediabetes, to evaluate their potential use for the assessment of novel prevention strategies and to discuss the knowledge gaps, challenges and opportunities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

We searched Medline, Embase, EconLit and NHS EED between 2000 and 2018 for studies reporting computer simulation models of the natural history of individuals with prediabetes and/or we used decision models to evaluate the impact of treatment strategies on these populations. Data were extracted following PRISMA guidelines and assessed using modelling checklists. Two reviewers independently assessed 50% of the titles and abstracts to determine whether a full text review was needed. Of these, 10% was assessed by each reviewer to cross-reference the decision to proceed to full review. Using a standardized form and double extraction, each of four reviewers extracted 50% of the identified studies.

RESULTS:

A total of 29 published decision models that simulate prediabetes populations were identified. Studies showed large variations in the definition of prediabetes and model structure. The inclusion of complications in prediabetes (n = 8) and type 2 diabetes (n = 17) health states also varied. A minority of studies simulated annual changes in risk factors (glycaemia, HbA1c, blood pressure, BMI, lipids) as individuals progressed in the models (n = 7) and accounted for heterogeneity among individuals with prediabetes (n = 7).

CONCLUSIONS:

Current prediabetes decision models have considerable limitations in terms of their quality and validity and do not allow evaluation of stratified strategies using novel biomarkers, highlighting a clear need for more comprehensive prediabetes decision models.

KEYWORDS:

biomarker; decision model; economic evaluation; prediabetes; stratified treatment; systematic review

PMID:
30828927
DOI:
10.1111/dom.13684

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center