Evidence mapPaperPMID 37090441Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2023

Development and validation of an insulin resistance model for a population without diabetes mellitus and its clinical implication: a prospective cohort study.

Shang-Feng Tsai, Chao-Tung Yang, Wei-Ju Liu, Chia-Lin Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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

53 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. DEFINE: A Prospective, Randomized, Phase 4 Trial to Assess a Protease Inhibitor-Based Regimen Switch Strategy to Manage Integrase Inhibitor-Related Weight Gain.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Comparing surrogate indexes for insulin resistance as predictors of type 2 diabetes.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2026
    Article
  6. Risk prediction of non-small cell lung cancer in patients with pulmonary nodules: a single-center cohort study based on six machine learning algorithms.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Shang-Feng TsaiDepartment of Post-Baccalaureate Medicine, College of Medicine, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Chao-Tung YangDepartment of Computer Science, Tunghai University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Wei-Ju LiuIntelligent Data Mining Laboratory, Department of Medical Research, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan.
Chia-Lin LeeDepartment of Post-Baccalaureate Medicine, College of Medicine, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Insulin resistance (IR) is associated with diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease (CV), and mortality. Few studies have used machine learning to predict IR in the non-diabetic population. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, we trained a predictive model for IR in the non-diabetic populations using the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES, from JAN 01, 1999 to DEC 31, 2012) database and the Taiwan MAJOR (from JAN 01, 2008 to DEC 31, 2017) database. We analysed participants in the NHANES and MAJOR and participants were excluded if they were aged <18 years old, had incomplete laboratory data, or had DM. To investigate the clinical implications (CV and all-cause mortality) of this trained model, we tested it with the Taiwan biobank (TWB) database from DEC 10, 2008 to NOV 30, 2018. We then used SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) values to explain differences across the machine learning models. Findings: Of all participants (combined NHANES and MJ databases), we randomly selected 14,705 participants for the training group, and 4018 participants for the validation group. In the validation group, their areas under the curve (AUC) were all >0.8 (highest being XGboost, 0.87). In the test group, all AUC were also >0.80 (highest being XGboost, 0.88). Among all 9 features (age, gender, race, body mass index, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), glycohemoglobin, triglyceride, total cholesterol and high-density cholesterol), BMI had the highest value of feature importance on IR (0.43 for XGboost and 0.47 for RF algorithms). All participants from the TWB database were separated into the IR group and the non-IR group according to the XGboost algorithm. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed a significant difference between the IR and non-IR groups (p < 0.0001 for CV mortality, and p = 0.0006 for all-cause mortality). Therefore, the XGboost model has clear clinical implications for predicting IR, aside from CV and all-cause mortality. Interpretation: To predict IR in non-diabetic patients with high accuracy, only 9 easily obtained features are needed for prediction accuracy using our machine learning model. Similarly, the model predicts IR patients with significantly higher CV and all-cause mortality. The model can be applied to both Asian and Caucasian populations in clinical practice. Funding: Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan and Japan Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI Grant Number JP21KK0293.

Indexed as

Insulin resistanceMachine learningMAJOR (MJ) research databaseNational health and nutrition examination survey (NHANES)Taiwan biobank (TWB)

Identifiers

PMID37090441
PMCPMC10119497

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.