ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2025
Machine learning-based coronary heart disease diagnosis model for type 2 diabetes patients.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine Learning Integration of Clinical and Molecular Biomarkers to Predict Vascular Complications in Type 2 Diabetes.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic value of systemic immune-inflammation composite index combined with triglyceride-glucose index in type 2 diabetes patients with coronary heart disease: a retrospective diagnostic model study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Toward Reliable Coronary Heart Disease Prediction: Integrating Multi-source Data with Ensemble Machine Learning.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Narrative review of the development of an ischaemic heart disease prognostic scoring tool (i-IHD score) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Malaysia.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2026Review
- Predicting cardiometabolic multimorbidity trajectory in middle-aged and older Chinese adults: insights from the cohort study on global ageing and adult health.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Global Scoping Review of Diagnostic, Symptom-Based, and Outcome Prediction Approaches.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Application of machine learning to predict the occurrence of venous thromboembolism in patients hospitalized for coronary artery disease: a single-center retrospective study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Review
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
Background: To establish a classification model for assisting the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) complicated with coronary heart disease (CHD). Methods: Patients with T2DM who underwent coronary angiography (CA) were enrolled from seven affiliated hospitals of Chongqing Medical University. Statistical differences in clinical variables between T2DM with or without CHD patients were verified using univariate analysis. The original data was divided into a training set and a validation set in a 7:3 ratio. The training set data were used to screen features using Logistic regression, Lasso regression, or recursive feature elimination (RFE). Five machine learning algorithms, including Logistic regression, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest (RF), eXtreme gradient boosting (XgBoost), and Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), were selected for modeling. The performance of the models was verified through 5-fold cross-validation and the training set. Results: Clinical data were collected from 1943 patients with T2DM complicated with CHD and 574 T2DM patients without CHD. Univariate analysis identified 20 optimal risk factors, four of the risk factors had over 30% missing values, we ultimately included 16 risk factors. Logistic regression screened eight features, Lasso regression screened ten features, the RFE method screened eight, fourteen, sixteen, and thirteen features for SVM, RF, XgBoost, and LightGBM, respectively. Among all models, the XgBoost model based on features selected by RFE+LightGBM demonstrated the best performance, achieving an AUC of 0.814 (95% CI, 0.779-0.847), accuracy of 0.799 (95% CI, 0.771-0.827), precision of 0.841 (95% CI, 0.812-0.868), recall of 0.920 (95% CI, 0.898-0.941), and F1-score of 0.879 (95% CI, 0.859-0.897) in the testing set. Conclusions: Based on T2DM data and machine learning theory, a Bayesian-optimized XgBoost model was established using the RFE+LightGBM method. This model effectively determines whether T2DM patients have CHD.
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.