ArticleJMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology2025
Optimizing Feature Selection and Machine Learning Algorithms for Early Detection of Prediabetes Risk: Comparative Study.
Article in JMIR bioinformatics and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning-driven decision support for antibiotic optimization in typhoid fever based on patient profiles.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Article
- Explainable Meta-Learning Ensemble Framework for Predicting Insulin Dose Adjustments in Diabetic Patients: A Comparative Machine Learning Approach with SHAP-Based Clinical Interpretability.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- How quantum-chemical geometry optimization level affects classical 3D descriptors and QSAR performance: a comparative study.Journal of cheminformatics · 2026Article
- Non-Glycemic Clinical Data for Type 2 Diabetes Detection in Mexican Adults: A Comparative Analysis of Atherogenic Indices, Statistical Transformations, and Machine Learning Algorithms.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A hybrid ensemble approach for diabetes prediction using consensus-based feature selection.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prediabetes is an intermediate stage between normal glucose metabolism and diabetes and is associated with increased risk of complications like cardiovascular disease and kidney failure. Objective: It is crucial to recognize individuals with prediabetes early in order to apply timely intervention strategies to decelerate or prohibit diabetes development. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of machine learning (ML) algorithms in predicting prediabetes and identifying its key clinical predictors. Methods: Multiple ML models are evaluated in this study, including random forest, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), support vector machine (SVM), and k-nearest neighbors (KNNs), on a dataset of 4743 individuals. For improved performance and interpretability, key clinical features were selected using LASSO (Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator) regression and principal component analysis (PCA). To optimize model accuracy and reduce overfitting, we used hyperparameter tuning with RandomizedSearchCV for XGBoost and random forest, and GridSearchCV for SVM and KNN. SHAP (Shapley Additive Explanations) was used to assess model-agnostic feature importance. To resolve data imbalance, SMOTE (Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique) was applied to ensure reliable classifications. Results: A cross-validated ROC-AUC (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve) score of 0.9117 highlighted the robustness of random forest in generalizing across datasets among the models tested. XGBoost followed closely, providing balanced accuracy in distinguishing between normal and prediabetic cases. While SVMs and KNNs performed adequately as baseline models, they exhibited limitations in sensitivity. The SHAP analysis indicated that BMI, age, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol emerged as the key predictors across models. The performance was significantly enhanced through hyperparameter tuning; for example, the ROC-AUC for SVM increased from 0.813 (default) to 0.863 (tuned). PCA kept 12 components while maintaining 95% of the variance in the dataset. Conclusions: It is demonstrated in this research that optimized ML models, especially random forest and XGBoost, are effective tools for assessing early prediabetes risk. Combining SHAP analysis with LASSO and PCA enhances transparency, supporting their integration in real-time clinical decision support systems. Future directions include validating these models in diverse clinical settings and integrating additional biomarkers to improve prediction accuracy, offering a promising avenue for early intervention and personalized treatment strategies in preventive health care.
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.