Prognostic models for all‐cause and cardiovascular mortality in type 2 diabetes: Systematic review
Authors' conclusion
Prediction models for mortality in T2DM show considerable heterogeneity in methodology, performance and validation. Limited external validation and inconsistent calibration reporting highlight the need for robust, generalisable and transparently reported models to improve clinical risk stratification in diabetes care.
Study context
- Population
- Studies (published January 1, 2015–June 11, 2024) reporting prognostic models developed and/or validated to predict all-cause or cardiovascular mortality in individuals with T2D26 cohort studies
- Outcome
- Prognostic models for mortality in T2D
Methodological detailsCHARMS checklist data extraction, PROBAST risk of bias assessment, Searched Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science, 18,126 records; 10,921 screened; 147 full texts assessed
- CHARMS checklist data extraction
- PROBAST risk of bias assessment
- Searched Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science
- 18,126 records; 10,921 screened; 147 full texts assessed
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
- Discrimination: median C-statistic
- 0.77 (IQR: 0.72-0.81)
- Studies on all-cause mortality
- 26
- Studies on cardiovascular mortality
- 8
- Calibration reported
- 20 studies
- Prediction horizons
- 1 to 15 years; 5-year most common (n = 10)
- Cox regression most common method
- n = 16
- Sample sizes, median [IQR]
- 20,554 [1931-59,180]
- Most models from Taiwan and the USA
- n = 5 each
Original publication
Prognostic models for all‐cause and cardiovascular mortality in type 2 diabetes: Systematic review. Diabet Med. Published 28 January 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →