Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40158079›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2025

A cross-sectional study comparing machine learning and logistic regression techniques for predicting osteoporosis in a group at high risk of cardiovascular disease among old adults.

Yuyi Peng, Chi Zhang, Bo Zhou

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yuyi PengDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Medicine, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Chi ZhangDepartment of Orthopedics, The Fourth Affiliated Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China.
Bo ZhouDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Medicine, The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China. zhoubo@cmu.edu.cn.

Funding

Scientific Research Project from the Education Department of Liaoning Province JYTMS20230110Scientific Research Project from the Education Department of Liaoning Province LJKMZ20221209
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOsteoporosis has become a significant public health concern that necessitates the application of appropriate techniques to calculate disease risk. Traditional methods, such as logistic regression,have been widely used to identify risk factors and predict disease probability. However,with the advent of advanced statistics techniques,machine learning models offer promising alternatives for improving prediction accuracy. What's more, studies that use risk factors and prediction models for osteoporosis in high-risk groups for cardiovascular diseases are scarce. We aimed to explore the risk factors and disease probability of osteoporosis by comparing logistic regression with four machine learning models. By doing so,we seek to provide insights into the most effective methods for osteoporosis risk assessment and contribute to the development of tailored prevention strategies at high risk of cardiovascular disease among old adults.

methodsWe carried out a cross-sectional investigation of a high-risk group in cardiovascular patients. A logistic regression model and four common machine learning methods,DT,RF,SVM,and XGBoost were implemented to create a prediction model using information from 211 participants who met the inclusion requirements. Metrics for calibration and discrimination were used to compare the models.

resultsIn total,211 patients were enrolled. The AUCs were 0.751 for the logistic regression model,0.72 for the SVM model,0.70 for the random forest model,0.697 for the model XGBoost,and 0.69 for the decision tree model. The logistic regression model outperforms other models for machine learning. According to the logistic regression model,there were nine predictors,including age,sex,glucose,TG (triglyceride),fracture history,stroke history,and CNV (copy number variation) nssv659422, and low-sodium salt. A well-calibrated result of 0.199 on the Brier scale. The findings of the internal validation demonstrated the high degree of repeatability of the prediction model employed in this study.

conclusionsIn this study, we discovered that when predicting osteoporosis,a number of machine learning techniques fell short of logistic regression. In a specific population, we have innovatively developed a risk prediction model for osteoporosis events that integrates genetic and environmental factors, is an effective tool for assessing osteoporosis risk and can serve as the basis for specialized intervention approaches.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesMachine LearningOsteoporosisAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsCopy number variantsLow sodium salt intakeMachine learningOsteoporosisPrediction model

Identifiers

PMID40158079
PMCPMC11954202

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.