Cited by 8Chronic Kidney Disease and DiabetesRenal Diseases and GlomerulopathiesAcute Kidney Injury Research

A Novel Risk Score Model for the Differential Diagnosis of Type 2 Diabetic Nephropathy: A Multicenter Study

Open access
Zhao, Yuetong, Liu, Lin, Zuo, Li, Zhou, Xianghai, Wang, Song, Gao, Hongwei, Yu, Feng, Zhang, Xiaomei +12 more·2023·Journal of Diabetes Research

Abstract

Introduction. DN is a common complication of diabetes. However, diabetes combined with renal injury may involve DN or NDKD, with different treatment schemes. The purpose of our study was to determine the independent risk factors of DN and establish a risk score model to help differentiate DN and NDKD, providing a reference for clinical treatment. Methods. A total of 678 T2D patients who had undergone renal biopsy in four affiliated hospitals of Peking University were consecutively enrolled. Patients were assigned to the DN group and NDKD group according to histopathological results. Seventy percent of patients from PKUFH were randomly assigned to the training group, and the remaining 30% were assigned to the internal validation group. Patients from the other three centers were assigned to the external validation group. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses to identify independent risk factors of DN in the training group and conducted multivariate logistic regression analysis with these independent risk factors in the training group to find regression coefficients “β” to establish a risk score model. Finally, we conducted internal and external validation of the model with ROC curves. Results. Diabetic retinopathy, diabetes duration≥5 years, eGFR<30 ml/min/1.73 m2, 24 h UTP≥3 g, and no hematuria were independent risk factors (P<0.05), and each factor scored 2, 1, 1, 1, and 1. We assigned the patients to a low-risk group (0-1 points), a medium-risk group (2-3 points), and a high-risk group (4-6 points), representing unlikely DN, possibly DN, and a high probability of DN, respectively. The AUCs were 0.860, 0.924, and 0.855 for the training, internal validation, and external validation groups, respectively. Conclusion. The risk score model could help differentiate DN and NDKD in a noninvasive manner, reduce the number of renal biopsies, and provide a reference for clinical treatment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1155/2023/5514767

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [24]Chemouny J. M. Sannier A. Hanouna G. Criteria to indicate kidney biopsy in type 2 diabetic patients with proteinuria: survey among french nephrologists Nephrologie & Therapeutique 2019 15 7 524 531 10.1016/j.nephro.2019.05.004 31718993 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhao, Y., Liu, L., Zuo, L., Zhou, X., Wang, S., Gao, H., Yu, F., Zhang, X., Wang, M., Chen, L., Zhang, R., Zhang, F., Bi, S., Bai, Q., Ding, J., Yang, Q., Xin, S., Chai, S., Chen, M., & Zhang, J.
Affiliations
  • Peking University First Hospital (CN)
  • Peking University People's Hospital (CN)
  • Peking University Third Hospital (CN)
  • Peking University International Hospital (CN)
  • Department of Nephrology, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing, China
  • Department of Nephrology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
  • Peking University (CN)
Corresponding author
Zhang, Junqing
Venue
Journal of Diabetes Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-12-21
Volume
2023
Pages
1-9
ISSN
  • 2314-6745 (ISSN-L)
  • 2314-6753
OpenAlex
W4390080698
Cited by
8
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Diabetes Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • PKU-Baidu Fund (2020BD040, D171100002817001, 2016YFC1305405, 2016YFC1305401, 81970701)
  • Beijing Science and Technology Plan Project (2020BD040, D171100002817001, 2016YFC1305405, 2016YFC1305401, 81970701)
  • National Basic Research Program of China (2020BD040, D171100002817001, 2016YFC1305405, 2016YFC1305401, 81970701)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (2020BD040, D171100002817001, 2016YFC1305405, 2016YFC1305401, 81970701)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Renal Diseases and Glomerulopathies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Acute Kidney Injury Research
Keywords
diabetic nephropathy, non-diabetic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, risk scoring, differential diagnosis, risk factors, diabetic retinopathy, estimated glomerular filtration rate, urinary protein, diabetes duration, renal biopsy, histopathology
MeSH terms
Biopsy, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diabetic Nephropathies, Diagnosis, Differential, Humans, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review