However, for the same reasons that multivariate risk algorithms are increasingly being encouraged in clinical medicine, this assessment is critical to determining the best approach to inform policies and interventions that will reduce risk in the population and arguably even more important

given the associated complexities, costs and challenges with population risk prevention (Burke et al., 2003). There are some limitations to note when interpreting these findings. Firstly, we focused on a simplified intervention scenario that has a fixed effect across Modulators targeted interventions groups. It’s possible that the intervention impact could vary based on the population targeted. This is an assumption Bioactive Compound Library in vivo that could be easily tested with good empirical evidence to support the variation in effect, although studies have shown that relative risk reductions are relatively constant across populations with different baseline risk (Furukawa et al., 2002). MK-1775 purchase Although out of scope of this study, the

composition of prevention strategies, including the role of policies that facilitate prevention (Glickman et al., 2012 and Ratner, 2012), is an important area of future research that can be informed by population risk tools. Secondly, DPoRT is validated to estimate risk of physician diagnosed diabetes, and underestimates total diabetes risk (i.e. undiagnosed diabetes). Finally, measurement error is always a possibility with the self-reported risk factors used in this study. Although we have found DPoRT estimates

to be minimally influenced by measurement error (Rosella et al., 2012), there is a possibility of misclassification of risk. This study provides a practical and meaningful way to better understand how magnitude and distribution of diabetes risk in the Canadian population can influence the benefit of prevention strategies. As risk is increasingly dispersed among the target second population, the nature of interventions and/or their expected impact must be modified. Finally and importantly, this research demonstrates a mechanism whereby routinely-collected population-level data can be used to inform prevention approaches. The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interests. “
“The authors regret that there is an error in the way that the values for minutes of lifestyle activities (LA) were reported (Camhi et al., 2011). The values in Table 1 for LA min/day should read 89.2 ± 2.5. Also, corrected columns from Table 2 appear below. This error also necessitates the following corrections to the text: Abstract: Greater time in LA (min/day), independent from MVPA, was associated with lower odds of elevated triglycerides (OR, 95% CI per 30 LA minutes: (0.88, 0.80–0.98), low HDL-C (0.88, 0.83–0.94), elevated waist circumference (0.89, 0.84–0.95), metabolic syndrome (0.88, 0.80–0.97), and diabetes (0.65, 0.51–0.83)).