ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Advanced supervised machine learning methods for precise diabetes mellitus prediction using feature selection.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A predictive study of glycaemic reversal in Chinese individuals with prediabetes based on machine learning: a 5-year cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic metabolic disorder that poses a significant global health challenge, affecting millions, many of whom remain undiagnosed in the early stages. If left untreated, diabetes can result in severe complications such as blindness, stroke, cancer, joint pain, and kidney failure. Accurate and early prediction is critical for timely intervention. Recent advancements in machine learning techniques (MLT) have shown promising potential in enhancing disease prediction due to their robust pattern recognition and classification capabilities. Materials and methods: This study presents a comparative analysis of supervised MLT such as Support Vector Machine (SVM), Naïve Bayes (NB), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), and Random Forest (RF) using the Pima Indian Diabetes dataset (PIDD) from the UCI repository. A 10-fold cross-validation approach was employed to mitigate class imbalance and ensure generalizability. Performance was evaluated using standard classification metrics: accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score. Results: Among the evaluated models, SVM outperformed the others with an accuracy of 91.5%, followed by RF (90%), KNN (89%), and NB (83%). The study highlights the effectiveness of SVM in early diabetes prediction and demonstrates how model performance varies with algorithm selection. Conclusion: Unlike many prior studies that focus on a single algorithm or overlook validation robustness, this research offers a comprehensive comparison of popular classifiers and emphasizes the value of cross-validation in medical prediction tasks. The proposed framework advances the field by identifying optimal models for real-world diabetes risk assessment.
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.