ArticlePloS one2026
Developing count regression techniques for predicting the number of new type 2 diabetes cases in Saudi Arabia.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a chronic condition affecting millions globally. A robust predictive model to estimate the number of new cases of T2D can facilitate precise monitoring and effective intervention strategies. This study aims to predict the number of new T2D cases per month in Saudi Arabia and identify the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) associated with T2D, using count regression models, Poisson Regression (PR), Negative Binomial Regression (NBR), Poisson Inverse Gaussian Regression (PIGR), and Bell Regression (BR). De-identified data from 1,000 patients with T2D in Saudi Arabia were used to develop the models. The performance of the full models, which include recommended Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), is compared using metrics such as the coefficient of determination (R2), root mean squared error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), 10-fold cross-validation (CV-10), Akaike information criterion (AIC), and Bayesian information criterion (BIC). The most significant KPIs identified by the full models were utilized to develop the reduced models. The full NBR model outperformed other models, achieving R² of 0.88, RMSE of 0.93, MAE of 0.69, CV-10 of 1.21, AIC = 873.23, and BIC = 880. The reduced NBR model, focusing solely on the five most influential variables (marital status, age, body mass index (BMI), total cholesterol (TC), and high-density lipoprotein (HDL)), with R² = 0.84, RMSE = 1.10, MAE = 0.86, CV-10 = 1.37, AIC = 899, and BIC = 910, also outperformed other reduced models. The Likelihood Ratio Test (LRT) did not show a significant difference between the full and reduced NBR models (p = 0.694), supporting the adequacy of the reduced model. The proposed reduced model, utilizing only five significant KPIs, can help healthcare providers develop effective, targeted strategies by monitoring a smaller number of KPIs to reduce the rising number of T2D cases in Saudi Arabia.
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.