ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Using a robust model to detect the association between anthropometric factors and T2DM: machine learning approaches.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. 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.
- The impact of obesity on bone health: molecular pathways, metabolic interactions, and associated pathologies.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2026Review
- Privacy preservation in diabetic disease prediction using federated learning based on efficient cross stage recurrent model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Circulating CCN6/WISP3 in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients and its correlation with insulin resistance and inflammation: statistical and machine learning analyses.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 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
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the potential models to determine the most important anthropometric factors associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).
methodA dataset derived from the Mashhad Stroke and heart atherosclerotic disorders (MASHAD) study comprising 9354 subject aged 65 - 35. 25% (2336 people) of subjects were diabetic and 75% (7018 people) where non-diabetic was used for the analysis of 10 anthropometric factors and age that were measured in all patients. A K-nearest neighbor (KNN) model was used to assess the association between T2DM and selected factors. The model was evaluated using accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision and f1-measure parameters. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and factor importance analysis were also determined. The performance of the KNN model was compared with Artificial neural network (ANN) and support vector machine (SVM) models.
resultAfter feature selection analysis and assessing multicollinearity, six factors (Mid-arm Circumference (MAC), Waist Circumference (WC), Body Roundness Index (BRI), Body Adiposity Index (BAI), Body Mass Index (BMI), age) were used in the final model. BRI, BAI and MAC factors in males and BMI, BRI, and MAC factors in females were found to have the greatest association with T2DM. The accuracy of the KNN model was approximately 93% for both genders. The best K (number of neighbors) for the model was 4 which had the lowest error rate. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.985 for men and 0.986 for women. The KNN model achieved the best result of the models explored.
conclusionThe KNN model had a high accuracy (93%) for predicting the association between anthropometric factors and T2DM. Selecting the K parameter (nearest neighbor) has an essential impact on reducing the error rate. Feature selection analysis reduces the dimensions of the KNN model and increases the accuracy of final results.
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.