ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2024
A data-driven machine learning algorithm to predict the effectiveness of inulin intervention against type II diabetes.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mesoporous polydopamine and inulin hydrogel for improved deoxynojirimycin effect in type 2 diabetes mellitus management.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Targeting the gut microbiota: emerging strategies to enhance healing of diabetic foot ulcers.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Inulin andFrontiers in endocrinology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has increased in recent years. Alongside traditional pharmacological treatments, nutritional therapy has emerged as a crucial aspect of T2DM management. Inulin, a fructan-type soluble fiber that promotes the growth of probiotic species like Methods: Original data were obtained from a previous study. After screening T2DM patients, feature election was conducted using LASSO regression, and a machine learning model was developed using XGBoost. The model's performance was evaluated based on accuracy, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and further analyzed using receiver operating curves, calibration curves, and decision curves. Results: Out of the 758 T2DM patients included, 477 had their glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels reduced to less than 6.5% after inulin intervention, resulting in an incidence rate of 62.93%. LASSO regression identified six key factors in patients prior to inulin treatment. The SHAP values for interpretation ranked the characteristic variables in descending order of importance: HbA1c, difference between fasting and 2 h-postprandial glucose levels, fasting blood glucose, high-density lipoprotein, age, and body mass index. The XGBoost prediction model demonstrated a training set accuracy of 0.819, specificity of 0.913, positive predictive value of 0.818, and negative predictive value of 0.820. The testing set showed an accuracy of 0.709, specificity of 0.909, positive predictive value of 0.705, and negative predictive value of 0.710. Conclusion: The XGBoost-SHAP framework for predicting the impact of inulin intervention in T2DM treatment proves to be effective. It allows for the comparison of prediction effect based on different features of an individual, assessment of prediction abilities for different individuals given their features, and establishes a connection between machine learning and nutritional intervention in T2DM treatment. This offers valuable insights for researchers in this field.
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.