ArticleEndocrine connections2024
Application of machine learning algorithm incorporating dietary intake in prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus.
Article in Endocrine connections, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Predictive Performance of Artificial Intelligence Algorithms for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Pregnant Women: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Construction of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting gestational diabetes mellitus based on 45 dietary nutrients.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Development of a machine learning-based interface for insulin dependency prediction using clinical data.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) significantly affects pregnancy outcomes. Therefore, it is crucial to develop prediction models since they can guide timely interventions to reduce the incidence of GDM and its associated adverse effects. Methods: A total of 554 pregnant women were selected and their sociodemographic characteristics, clinical data and dietary data were collected. Dietary data were investigated by a validated semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). We applied random forest mean decrease impurity for feature selection and the models are built using logistic regression, XGBoost, and LightGBM algorithms. The prediction performance of different models was compared by accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under curve (AUC) and Hosmer-Lemeshow test. Results: Blood glucose, age, pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI), triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL) were the top five features according to the feature selection. Among the three algorithms, XGBoost performed best with an AUC of 0.788, LightGBM came second (AUC = 0.749), and logistic regression performed the worst (AUC = 0.712). In addition, XGBoost and LightGBM both achieved a fairly good performance when dietary information was included, surpassing their performance on the non-dietary dataset (0.788 vs 0.718 in XGBoost; 0.749 vs 0.726 in LightGBM). Conclusion: XGBoost and LightGBM algorithms outperform logistic regression in predicting GDM among Chinese pregnant women. In addition, dietary data may have a positive effect on improving model performance, which deserves more in-depth investigation with larger sample size.
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.