ArticleScientific reports2024
Machine learning model for age-related macular degeneration based on heavy metals: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005 to 2008.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Exploration of Machine Learning Methods in Human Biomonitoring.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
- From environmental exposure to retinal pathology: epidemiological and mechanistic insights into multi-metal driven ocular diseases.Biometals : an international journal on the role of metal ions in biology, biochemistry, and medicine · 2026Article
- Combined exposure to three heavy metals and the risk of age-related macular degeneration in the Korean population.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Machine learning model for age related macular degeneration based on pesticides: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007-2008.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Associations between organophosphorus pesticides exposure and age-related macular degeneration risk in U.S. adults: analysis from interpretable machine learning approaches.International journal of ophthalmology · 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
Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of blindness in older people in developed countries. It has been suggested that heavy metal exposure may be associated with the development of AMD, but most studies have focused on the effects of a single metal with traditional methods. In this study, we analyzed the relationship between 13 urinary heavy metal concentrations and AMD using NHANES data between 2005 and 2008. We constructed and compared 11 machine learning models to identify the best model for predicting AMD risk. We further interpreted the models by Permutation Feature Importance (PFI), Partial Dependence Plot (PDP) analysis, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis. 216 AMD patients out of 2380 participants. The random forest (RF) model performed optimally in predicting the risk of AMD, with an AUC value of 0.970. PFI analyses revealed that age and urinary cadmium (Cd) were the main factors influencing the risk of AMD. SHAP analyses further confirmed the significance of Cd concentration in predicting the risk of AMD, and we revealed a significant interaction with significant interaction of race. Our study firstly explored the relationship between heavy metal exposure levels and AMD based on machine learning techniques, found that urinary Cd concentration had the greatest impact on AMD, and revealed the superior predictive performance of machine learning methods. Furthermore, our study provided a new perspective for early screening and intervention of AMD.
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.