Lengthy and expensive reviews that are «methodologically robust» but unusable in practice often fail to inform, inspire, or
influence.55 A recent systematic review of diabetes risk scores
revealed that the authors of most studies were primarily concerned with the intellectual concept of improving the predictive value of the score but had given
little or no thought to how their score might be used, by whom, or for what — nor what the implications would be for real people who would be designated «at risk» by the score.56