MetS Risk Score: A Clear Scoring Model to Predict a 3-Year Risk for Metabolic Syndrome

Abstract

Although several risk factors for metabolic syndrome (MetS) have been reported, there are few clinical scores that predict its incidence. Therefore, we created and validated a risk score for prediction of 3-year risk for MetS. Three-year follow-up data of 4395 initially MetS-free subjects, enrolled for an annual physical examination from Wenzhou Medical Center were analyzed. Subjects at enrollment were randomly divided into the training and the validation cohort. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were employed for model development. The selected variables were assigned an integer or half-integer risk score proportional to the estimated coefficient from the logistic model. Risk scores were tested in a validation cohort. The predictive performance of the model was tested by computing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Four independent predictors were chosen to construct the MetS risk score, including BMI (HR=1.906, 95% CI: 1.040-1.155), FPG (HR=1.507, 95% CI: 1.305-1.741), DBP (HR=1.061, 95% CI: 1.002-1.031), HDL-C (HR=0.539, 95% CI: 0.303-0.959). The model was created as -1.5 to 4 points, which demonstrated a considerable discrimination both in the training cohort (AUROC=0.674) and validation cohort (AUROC=0.690). Comparison of the observed with the estimated incidence of MetS revealed satisfactory precision. We developed and validated the MetS risk score with 4 risk factors to predict 3-year risk of MetS, useful for assessing the individual risk for MetS in medical practice.

Risk models and scores for metabolic syndrome: a systematic review

“…Consequently, a formal meta-analysis was precluded due to the heterogeneity of data particularly regarding the diverse demographics of the studied participants and different components of the scores. Surprisingly, the observed incidence/prevalence of MetS at the end of the study is not reported in nearly a third (twenty-nine per cent) of the studies [24,28,31,37,41,42]. For those that reported it, the prevalence/ incidence of MetS ranged from as little as one per cent to as high as thirty-seven per cent (median is thirteen per cent).…”

“…Of these 24 papers, 22 report about the development of one or more risk model or score [24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]37,38,[40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47], and 2 studies report about the development and external validation of one or more risk model or scores on an external population [36,39].Overall, the 24 studies reported 40 models, out of which 24 models were selected for full data extraction. The rest (16 models) were not selected, either because they were judged to be minimally different from the reported ones or they were not the preferred models by the authors or they were significantly deficient in details or statistical reporting.…”

“…Regarding the age of the sample, more risk scores were reported in adults than in children or adolescent. Of the 24 included models, 15 risk models were focused on adult subjects [24,25,29,[31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][41][42][43][44]47], while 8 targets children and adolescents [26][27][28]30,39,40,45,46]. Table 4.0 shows the details of the components of the included 24 risk models or scores as well as their statistical properties-which includes (where available) their "sensitivity, specificity, discrimination, calibration, positive and negative predictive values, AUROC".…”

Risk models and scores for metabolic syndrome: a systematic review

“…Furthermore, out of the 27 included papers, 25 report about the development of one or more risk model or score [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]32,33,[35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45], and 2 studies report about the development and validation of one or more risk model or scores on an external population [31,34]. Overall, the 27 studies reported 43 models, out of which 27 models were selected for full data extraction.…”

“…Regarding the target population, more risk scores were reported in adults than in children or adolescents. Of the 27 included models, 17 focused on adult subjects [19,20,24,[26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][36][37][38][39]42,45], while 10 targets children and adolescents [21][22][23]25,34,35,40,41,43,44].…”