Advertisement

Evaluating Community-Based Translational Interventions Using Historical Controls: Propensity Score vs. Disease Risk Score Approach

  • Luohua JiangEmail author
  • Shuai Chen
  • Janette Beals
  • Juned Siddique
  • Richard F. Hamman
  • Ann Bullock
  • Spero M. Manson
  • the Special Diabetes Program for Indians Diabetes Prevention Demonstration Project
  • Grant programs participating in the Special Diabetes Program for Indians Diabetes Prevention Program are as follows: Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation, Cherokee Nation, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, the Chickasaw Nation, Coeur d’Alene Tribe, Colorado River Indian Tribes, Colville Confederated Tribes, Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe, Klamath Tribes, and Coquille Tribe, Fond du Lac Reservation, Gila River Health Care, Haskell Health Center, Ho-Chunk Nation, Indian Health Board of Minneapolis, Indian Health Center of Santa Clara Valley, Native American Rehabilitation Association of the NW, Hunter Health, Kenaitze Indian Tribe IRA, Lawton IHS Service Unit, Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, Norton Sound Health Corporation, Pine Ridge IHS Service Unit, Pueblo of San Felipe, Quinault Indian Nation, Rapid City IHS Diabetes Program, Red Lake Comprehensive Health Services, Rocky Boy Health Board, Seneca Nation of Indians, Sonoma County Indian Health Project, South East Alaska Regional Health Consortium, Southcentral Foundation, Trenton Indian Service Area, Tuba City Regional Health Care Corporation, United American Indian Involvement, Inc., United Indian Health Services, Inc., Warm Springs Health & Wellness Center, Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, Zuni Pueblo.
Article

Abstract

Many community-based translations of evidence-based interventions are designed as one-arm studies due to ethical and other considerations. Evaluating the impacts of such programs is challenging. Here, we examine the effectiveness of the lifestyle intervention implemented by the Special Diabetes Program for Indians Diabetes Prevention (SDPI-DP) demonstration project, a translational lifestyle intervention among American Indian and Alaska Native communities. Data from the landmark Diabetes Prevention Program placebo group was used as a historical control. We compared the use of propensity score (PS) and disease risk score (DRS) matching to adjust for potential confounder imbalance between groups. The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for diabetes risk was 0.35 for SDPI-DP lifestyle intervention vs. control. However, when relevant diabetes risk factors were considered, the adjusted HR estimates were attenuated toward 1, ranging from 0.56 (95% CI 0.44–0.71) to 0.69 (95% CI 0.56–0.96). The differences in estimated HRs using the PS and DRS approaches were relatively small but DRS matching resulted in more participants being matched and smaller standard errors of effect estimates. Carefully employed, publicly available randomized clinical trial data can be used as a historical control to evaluate the intervention effectiveness of one-arm community translational initiatives. It is critical to use a proper statistical method to balance the distributions of potential confounders between comparison groups in this kind of evaluations.

Keywords

Comparative effectiveness evaluation Disease risk score Prognostic score Propensity score Single-arm intervention Historical controls 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express our gratitude to the Indian Health Service (IHS) as well as tribal and urban Indian health programs and participants involved in the SDPI-DP. The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the IHS. The DPP was conducted by the DPP Investigators and supported by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). This manuscript was not prepared in collaboration with the Investigators of the DPP study and does not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the DPP study or the NIDDK. The authors would also like to thank Dr. James Hill for his valuable scientific suggestions and comments.

Grant programs participating in the Special Diabetes Program for Indians Diabetes Prevention Program are as follows: Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation, Cherokee Nation, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, the Chickasaw Nation, Coeur d’Alene Tribe, Colorado River Indian Tribes, Colville Confederated Tribes, Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe, Klamath Tribes, and Coquille Tribe, Fond du Lac Reservation, Gila River Health Care, Haskell Health Center, Ho-Chunk Nation, Indian Health Board of Minneapolis, Indian Health Center of Santa Clara Valley, Native American Rehabilitation Association of the NW, Hunter Health, Kenaitze Indian Tribe IRA, Lawton IHS Service Unit, Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, Norton Sound Health Corporation, Pine Ridge IHS Service Unit, Pueblo of San Felipe, Quinault Indian Nation, Rapid City IHS Diabetes Program, Red Lake Comprehensive Health Services, Rocky Boy Health Board, Seneca Nation of Indians, Sonoma County Indian Health Project, South East Alaska Regional Health Consortium, Southcentral Foundation, Trenton Indian Service Area, Tuba City Regional Health Care Corporation, United American Indian Involvement, Inc., United Indian Health Services, Inc., Warm Springs Health & Wellness Center, Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, Zuni Pueblo.

Funding

Funding for the SDPI-DP project was provided by the Indian Health Service (HHSI242200400049C, S.M. Manson). Manuscript preparation was supported in part by American Diabetes Association (ADA #7-12-CT-36, L. Jiang), and National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) (1P30DK092923, S.M. Manson, and R21DK108187, L. Jiang).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The SDPI-DP protocol was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) of the University of Colorado and the National IHS IRB. The use of the DPP data from the NIDDK Central Repositories was approved by the University of California Irvine IRB.

Informed Consent

All participants provided written informed consent and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act authorization.

Supplementary material

11121_2019_980_MOESM1_ESM.docx (25 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 24.9 kb)
11121_2019_980_MOESM2_ESM.docx (36 kb)
ESM 2 (DOCX 35.7 kb)

References

  1. Arbogast, P. G., Kaltenbach, L., Ding, H., & Ray, W. A. (2008). Adjustment for multiple cardiovascular risk factors using a summary risk score. Epidemiology, 19, 30–37.  https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e31815be000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Arbogast, P. G., & Ray, W. A. (2009). Use of disease risk scores in pharmacoepidemiologic studies. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 18, 67–80.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0962280208092347.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Arbogast, P. G., & Ray, W. A. (2011). Performance of disease risk scores, propensity scores, and traditional multivariable outcome regression in the presence of multiple confounders. American Journal of Epidemiology, 174, 613–620.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwr143.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker, S. G., & Lindeman, K. S. (2001). Rethinking historical controls. Biostatistics, 2, 383–396.  https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/2.4.383.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Buntin, M. B., Jain, A. K., Mattke, S., & Lurie, N. (2009). Who gets disease management? Journal of General Internal Medicine, 24, 649–655.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-0950-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  7. Cefalu, W. T., Buse, J. B., Tuomilehto, J., Fleming, G. A., Ferrannini, E., Gerstein, H. C., et al. (2016). Update and next steps for real-world translation of interventions for type 2 diabetes prevention: Reflections from a diabetes care editors’ expert forum. Diabetes Care, 39, 1186–1201.  https://doi.org/10.2337/dc16-0873.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Cepeda, M. S., Boston, R., Farrar, J. T., & Strom, B. L. (2003). Comparison of logistic regression versus propensity score when the number of events is low and there are multiple confounders. American Journal of Epidemiology, 158, 280–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chevreul, K., Brunn, M., Cadier, B., Nolte, E., & Durand-Zaleski, I. (2014). Evaluating structured care for diabetes: Can calibration on margins help to avoid overestimation of the benefits? An illustration from French diabetes provider networks using data from the ENTRED survey. Diabetes Care, 37, 1892–1899.  https://doi.org/10.2337/dc13-2141.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Collaboration, N. C. D. R. F. (2015). Effects of diabetes definition on global surveillance of diabetes prevalence and diagnosis: A pooled analysis of 96 population-based studies with 331,288 participants. The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology, 3, 624–637.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(15)00129-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cuticchia, A. J., Cooley, P. C., Hall, R. D., & Qin, Y. (2006). NIDDK data repository: A central collection of clinical trial data. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 6, 19.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-6-19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. D'Agostino, R. B., Jr. (1998). Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Statistics in Medicine, 17, 2265–2281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. D'Agostino, R. B., Sr., Vasan, R. S., Pencina, M. J., Wolf, P. A., Cobain, M., Massaro, J. M., & Kannel, W. B. (2008). General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation, 117, 743–753.  https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.699579.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Drake, C. (1993). Effects of misspecification of the propensity score on estimators of treatment effect. Biometrics, 49, 1231–1236.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2532266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunkley, A. J., Bodicoat, D. H., Greaves, C. J., Russell, C., Yates, T., Davies, M. J., & Khunti, K. (2014). Diabetes prevention in the real world: Effectiveness of pragmatic lifestyle interventions for the prevention of type 2 diabetes and of the impact of adherence to guideline recommendations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Care, 37, 922–933.  https://doi.org/10.2337/dc13-2195.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Flamm, M., Panisch, S., Winkler, H., & Sonnichsen, A. C. (2012). Impact of a randomized control group on perceived effectiveness of a disease management programme for diabetes type 2. European Journal of Public Health, 22, 625–629.  https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckr147.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Grodstein, F., Stampfer, M. J., Manson, J. E., Colditz, G. A., Willett, W. C., Rosner, B., . . . Hennekens, C. H. (1996). Postmenopausal estrogen and progestin use and the risk of cardiovascular disease. The New England Journal of Medicine, 335, 453–461.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199608153350701.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Guo, S. Y., & Fraser, M. W. (2009). Propensity score analysis: Statistical methods and applications: SAGE Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Hansen, B. (2008). The prognostic analogue of the propensity score. Biometrika, 95, 481–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harrell, F. E., Jr., Lee, K. L., Matchar, D. B., & Reichert, T. A. (1985). Regression models for prognostic prediction: Advantages, problems, and suggested solutions. Cancer Treat Rep, 69, 1071–1077.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Henry, D., Tolan, P., Gorman-Smith, D., & Schoeny, M. (2017). Alternatives to randomized control trial designs for community-based prevention evaluation. Prevention Science, 18, 671–680.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-0706-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Inman, H. F., & Bradley, E. L. (1989). The overlapping coefficient as a measure of agreement between probability-distributions and point estimation of the overlap of 2 normal densities. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 18, 3851–3874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jiang, L., Manson, S. M., Beals, J., Henderson, W. G., Huang, H., Acton, K. J., et al. (2013). Translating the diabetes prevention program into American Indian and Alaska native communities: Results from the special diabetes program for Indians diabetes prevention demonstration project. Diabetes Care, 36, 2027–2034.  https://doi.org/10.2337/dc12-1250.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Kahn, H. S., Cheng, Y. J., Thompson, T. J., Imperatore, G., & Gregg, E. W. (2009). Two risk-scoring systems for predicting incident diabetes mellitus in U.S. adults age 45 to 64 years. Annals of Internal Medicine, 150, 741–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Klein, S., Allison, D. B., Heymsfield, S. B., Kelley, D. E., Leibel, R. L., Nonas, C., et al. (2007). Waist circumference and cardiometabolic risk: A consensus statement from shaping America’s health: Association for Weight Management and Obesity Prevention; NAASO, the Obesity Society; the American Society for Nutrition; and the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care, 30, 1647–1652.  https://doi.org/10.2337/dc07-9921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Knowler, W. C., Barrett-Connor, E., Fowler, S. E., Hamman, R. F., Lachin, J. M., Walker, E. A., & Nathan, D. M. (2002). Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. The New England Journal of Medicine, 346, 393–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lee, E. T., Howard, B. V., Wang, W., Welty, T. K., Galloway, J. M., Best, L. G., et al. (2006). Prediction of coronary heart disease in a population with high prevalence of diabetes and albuminuria: The strong heart study. Circulation, 113, 2897–2905.  https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.593178.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Lindstrom, J., & Tuomilehto, J. (2003). The diabetes risk score: A practical tool to predict type 2 diabetes risk. Diabetes Care, 26, 725–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mann, D. M., Bertoni, A. G., Shimbo, D., Carnethon, M. R., Chen, H., Jenny, N. S., & Muntner, P. (2010). Comparative validity of 3 diabetes mellitus risk prediction scoring models in a multiethnic US cohort: The multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis. American Journal of Epidemiology, 171, 980–988.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq030.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Manson, J. E., Hsia, J., Johnson, K. C., Rossouw, J. E., Assaf, A. R., Lasser, N. L., et al. (2003). Estrogen plus progestin and the risk of coronary heart disease. The New England Journal of Medicine, 349, 523–534.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa030808.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Meijnikman, A. S., De Block, C. E. M., Dirinck, E., Verrijken, A., Mertens, I., Corthouts, B., & Van Gaal, L. F. (2017). Not performing an OGTT results in significant underdiagnosis of (pre)diabetes in a high risk adult Caucasian population. International Journal of Obesity, 41, 1615–1620.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2017.165.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Miettinen, O. S. (1976). Stratification by a multivariate confounder score. American Journal of Epidemiology, 104, 609–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Noble, D., Mathur, R., Dent, T., Meads, C., & Greenhalgh, T. (2011). Risk models and scores for type 2 diabetes: Systematic review. BMJ, 343, d7163.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d7163.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Norris, S. L., Zhang, X., Avenell, A., Gregg, E., Bowman, B., Schmid, C. H., & Lau, J. (2005). Long-term effectiveness of weight-loss interventions in adults with pre-diabetes: A review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28, 126–139.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2004.08.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Pan, X. R., Li, G. W., Hu, Y. H., Wang, J. X., Yang, W. Y., An, Z. X., et al. (1997). Effects of diet and exercise in preventing NIDDM in people with impaired glucose tolerance. The Da Qing IGT and Diabetes Study. Diabetes Care, 20, 537–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Peduzzi, P., Concato, J., Kemper, E., Holford, T. R., & Feinstein, A. R. (1996). A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49, 1373–1379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Prentice, R. L., Pettinger, M., & Anderson, G. L. (2005). Statistical issues arising in the Women’s Health Initiative. Biometrics, 61, 899–911; discussion 911-841.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341X.2005.454_1.x.
  38. Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.  https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/70.1.41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1985). Constructing a control-group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. American Statistician, 39, 33–38.Google Scholar
  40. Schmidt, M. I., Duncan, B. B., Bang, H., Pankow, J. S., Ballantyne, C. M., Golden, S. H., et al. (2005). Identifying individuals at high risk for diabetes: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study. Diabetes Care, 28, 2013–2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stern, M. P., Williams, K., & Haffner, S. M. (2002). Identification of persons at high risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus: Do we need the oral glucose tolerance test? Annals of Internal Medicine, 136, 575–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sturmer, T., Schneeweiss, S., Brookhart, M. A., Rothman, K. J., Avorn, J., & Glynn, R. J. (2005). Analytic strategies to adjust confounding using exposure propensity scores and disease risk scores: Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and short-term mortality in the elderly. American Journal of Epidemiology, 161, 891–898.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwi106.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Sussman, J. B., Kent, D. M., Nelson, J. P., & Hayward, R. A. (2015). Improving diabetes prevention with benefit based tailored treatment: Risk based reanalysis of Diabetes Prevention Program. BMJ, 350, h454.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h454.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. The Diabetes Prevention Program. (1999). The Diabetes Prevention Program. Design and methods for a clinical trial in the prevention of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 22, 623–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tuomilehto, J., Lindstrom, J., Eriksson, J. G., Valle, T. T., Hamalainen, H., Ilanne-Parikka, P., et al. (2001). Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. The New England Journal of Medicine, 344, 1343–1350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Varas-Lorenzo, C., Garcia-Rodriguez, L. A., Perez-Gutthann, S., & Duque-Oliart, A. (2000). Hormone replacement therapy and incidence of acute myocardial infarction. A population-based nested case-control study. Circulation, 101, 2572–2578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wareham, N. J. (2015). Mind the gap: Efficacy versus effectiveness of lifestyle interventions to prevent diabetes. The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology, 3, 160–161.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(15)70015-X.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilson, P. W., D'Agostino, R. B., Levy, D., Belanger, A. M., Silbershatz, H., & Kannel, W. B. (1998). Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. Circulation, 97, 1837–1847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilson, P. W., Meigs, J. B., Sullivan, L., Fox, C. S., Nathan, D. M., & D'Agostino, R. B., Sr. (2007). Prediction of incident diabetes mellitus in middle-aged adults: The Framingham Offspring Study. Archives of Internal Medicine, 167, 1068–1074.  https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.167.10.1068.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Wyss, R., Ellis, A. R., Brookhart, M. A., Jonsson Funk, M., Girman, C. J., Simpson, R. J., Jr., & Sturmer, T. (2015). Matching on the disease risk score in comparative effectiveness research of new treatments. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 24, 951–961.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3810.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Wyss, R., Hansen, B. B., Ellis, A. R., Gagne, J. J., Desai, R. J., Glynn, R. J., & Sturmer, T. (2017). The “dry-run” analysis: A method for evaluating risk scores for confounding control. American Journal of Epidemiology, 185, 842–852.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwx032.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Prevention Research 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luohua Jiang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Shuai Chen
    • 2
  • Janette Beals
    • 3
  • Juned Siddique
    • 4
  • Richard F. Hamman
    • 5
  • Ann Bullock
    • 6
  • Spero M. Manson
    • 3
  • the Special Diabetes Program for Indians Diabetes Prevention Demonstration Project
  • Grant programs participating in the Special Diabetes Program for Indians Diabetes Prevention Program are as follows: Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation, Cherokee Nation, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, the Chickasaw Nation, Coeur d’Alene Tribe, Colorado River Indian Tribes, Colville Confederated Tribes, Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe, Klamath Tribes, and Coquille Tribe, Fond du Lac Reservation, Gila River Health Care, Haskell Health Center, Ho-Chunk Nation, Indian Health Board of Minneapolis, Indian Health Center of Santa Clara Valley, Native American Rehabilitation Association of the NW, Hunter Health, Kenaitze Indian Tribe IRA, Lawton IHS Service Unit, Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin, Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, Norton Sound Health Corporation, Pine Ridge IHS Service Unit, Pueblo of San Felipe, Quinault Indian Nation, Rapid City IHS Diabetes Program, Red Lake Comprehensive Health Services, Rocky Boy Health Board, Seneca Nation of Indians, Sonoma County Indian Health Project, South East Alaska Regional Health Consortium, Southcentral Foundation, Trenton Indian Service Area, Tuba City Regional Health Care Corporation, United American Indian Involvement, Inc., United Indian Health Services, Inc., Warm Springs Health & Wellness Center, Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, Zuni Pueblo.
  1. 1.Department of Epidemiology, School of MedicineUniversity of California IrvineIrvineUSA
  2. 2.Division of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health SciencesUniversity of California DavisDavisUSA
  3. 3.Centers for American Indian and Alaska Native Health, Colorado School of Public HealthUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical CampusAuroraUSA
  4. 4.Department of Preventive Medicine, Feinberg School of MedicineNorthwestern UniversityChicagoUSA
  5. 5.Department of Epidemiology, Colorado School of Public Health, LEAD CenterUniversity of Colorado Anschutz Medical CampusAuroraUSA
  6. 6.Division of Diabetes Treatment and PreventionIndian Health ServiceRockvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations