ArticleJMIRx med2024
Machine Learning-Based Hyperglycemia Prediction: Enhancing Risk Assessment in a Cohort of Undiagnosed Individuals.
Article in JMIRx med, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Noncommunicable diseases continue to pose a substantial health challenge globally, with hyperglycemia serving as a prominent indicator of diabetes. Objective: This study employed machine learning algorithms to predict hyperglycemia in a cohort of individuals who were asymptomatic and unraveled crucial predictors contributing to early risk identification. Methods: This dataset included an extensive array of clinical and demographic data obtained from 195 adults who were asymptomatic and residing in a suburban community in Nigeria. The study conducted a thorough comparison of multiple machine learning algorithms to ascertain the most effective model for predicting hyperglycemia. Moreover, we explored feature importance to pinpoint correlates of high blood glucose levels within the cohort. Results: Elevated blood pressure and prehypertension were recorded in 8 (4.1%) and 18 (9.2%) of the 195 participants, respectively. A total of 41 (21%) participants presented with hypertension, of which 34 (83%) were female. However, sex adjustment showed that 34 of 118 (28.8%) female participants and 7 of 77 (9%) male participants had hypertension. Age-based analysis revealed an inverse relationship between normotension and age (r=-0.88; P=.02). Conversely, hypertension increased with age (r=0.53; P=.27), peaking between 50-59 years. Of the 195 participants, isolated systolic hypertension and isolated diastolic hypertension were recorded in 16 (8.2%) and 15 (7.7%) participants, respectively, with female participants recording a higher prevalence of isolated systolic hypertension (11/16, 69%) and male participants reporting a higher prevalence of isolated diastolic hypertension (11/15, 73%). Following class rebalancing, the random forest classifier gave the best performance (accuracy score 0.89; receiver operating characteristic-area under the curve score 0.89; F1-score 0.89) of the 26 model classifiers. The feature selection model identified uric acid and age as important variables associated with hyperglycemia. Conclusions: The random forest classifier identified significant clinical correlates associated with hyperglycemia, offering valuable insights for the early detection of diabetes and informing the design and deployment of therapeutic interventions. However, to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of each feature's contribution to blood glucose levels, modeling additional relevant clinical features in larger datasets could be beneficial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.