ArticleEndocrine2025
Development and validation of Age-Specific algorithms for diabetes prediction.
Article in Endocrine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetes mellitus (DM) has a higher incidence among older adults. This study aimed to develop age-specific DM prediction models using machine learning (ML) and anomaly detection algorithms. We included 489,073 participants from Kanazawa City and 31,923 from Hakui City who underwent health check-ups. Four models were constructed, comprising a Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LGBM), TabNet, Variational Autoencoder, and Isolation Forest (IF), to predict DM onset within three years. The models were trained using the Kanazawa dataset and externally validated using the Hakui dataset. Performance was evaluated based on the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity. The LGBM model demonstrated the highest AUC across multiple age groups in both internal and external validations. For participants in their 50s and 60s, the LGBM achieved AUC values of 0.911 during internal validation, with sensitivity and specificity exceeding those of the other models. In contrast, the IF model exhibited the best performance for participants in their 40s. The findings of this study suggest the potential effectiveness of age-specific models in improving diabetes prediction accuracy within the study population. Further validation using more diverse populations and younger age groups are recommended for future research.
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.