Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36028865›Full record

ArticleBMC endocrine disorders2022

Opening the black box: interpretable machine learning for predictor finding of metabolic syndrome.

Yan Zhang, Xiaoxu Zhang, Jaina Razbek, Deyang Li, Wenjun Xia, Liangliang Bao, Hongkai Mao, Mayisha Daken, Mingqin Cao

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC endocrine disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
9.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yan ZhangDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, College of Public Health, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China.
Xiaoxu ZhangDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, College of Public Health, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China.
Jaina RazbekDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, College of Public Health, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China.
Deyang LiDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, College of Public Health, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China.
Wenjun XiaDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, College of Public Health, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China.
Liangliang BaoDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, College of Public Health, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China.
Hongkai MaoDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, College of Public Health, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China.
Mayisha DakenDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, College of Public Health, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China.
Mingqin CaoDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, College of Public Health, Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China. 573596229@qq.com.
Xinjiang Medical University · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 71663053
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe internal workings ofmachine learning algorithms are complex and considered as low-interpretation "black box" models, making it difficult for domain experts to understand and trust these complex models. The study uses metabolic syndrome (MetS) as the entry point to analyze and evaluate the application value of model interpretability methods in dealing with difficult interpretation of predictive models.

methodsThe study collects data from a chain of health examination institution in Urumqi from 2017 ~ 2019, and performs 39,134 remaining data after preprocessing such as deletion and filling. RFE is used for feature selection to reduce redundancy; MetS risk prediction models (logistic, random forest, XGBoost) are built based on a feature subset, and accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, and AUROC value are used to evaluate the model classification performance; post-hoc model-agnostic interpretation methods (variable importance, LIME) are used to interpret the results of the predictive model.

resultsEighteen physical examination indicators are screened out by RFE, which can effectively solve the problem of physical examination data redundancy. Random forest and XGBoost models have higher accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, and AUROC values compared with logistic regression. XGBoost models have higher sensitivity, Youden index, and AUROC values compared with random forest. The study uses variable importance, LIME and PDP for global and local interpretation of the optimal MetS risk prediction model (XGBoost), and different interpretation methods have different insights into the interpretation of model results, which are more flexible in model selection and can visualize the process and reasons for the model to make decisions. The interpretable risk prediction model in this study can help to identify risk factors associated with MetS, and the results showed that in addition to the traditional risk factors such as overweight and obesity, hyperglycemia, hypertension, and dyslipidemia, MetS was also associated with other factors, including age, creatinine, uric acid, and alkaline phosphatase.

conclusionThe model interpretability methods are applied to the black box model, which can not only realize the flexibility of model application, but also make up for the uninterpretable defects of the model. Model interpretability methods can be used as a novel means of identifying variables that are more likely to be good predictors.

Indexed as

Metabolic SyndromeAlgorithmsHumansLogistic ModelsMachine LearningRisk FactorsData miningMachine learningMetabolic syndromeModel interpretabilityRisk prediction model

Identifiers

PMID36028865
PMCPMC9419421
OpenAlexW4293678349

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.