ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Machine learning models for predicting metabolic syndrome to support clinical decision-making in ART-treated adults living with HIV.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMetabolic syndrome (MetS) is an emerging complication among people living with HIV (PLHIV) receiving long-term antiretroviral therapy (ART), particularly with protease and integrase inhibitor regimens. Early identification of high-risk individuals remains challenging, and predictive tools are limited in African settings. This study evaluated nine machine learning (ML) algorithms for predicting MetS in ART-treated adults.
methodsWe analysed a retrospective cohort of 1,027 PLHIV without baseline MetS, followed for 144 weeks; 854 with complete data were included. Nine ML algorithms, including logistic regression, support vector machines, random forest, and XGBoost, were trained on 70% of the data using stratified repeated 10-fold cross-validation with hyperparameter tuning. Performance was assessed on a 30% test set using discrimination (AUC), calibration, and predictor importance.
resultsAge, sex, viral load, and alcohol use were the strongest predictors of metabolic syndrome in ART-treated individuals. Discrimination was modest across models (AUC 0.49-0.64), with radial SVM and logistic regression performing best (AUC ≈ 0.64). Calibration was generally acceptable (Brier score 0.16-0.19). Sensitivity-specificity trade-offs varied: XGBoost favored sensitivity (85.2%) but had low specificity (34.4%), whereas logistic regression and random forest achieved higher specificity (~ 75%). Overall, complex models offered limited gains over logistic regression.
conclusionsAlthough internally validated ML models demonstrated acceptable calibration and modest discrimination, predictive performance remains insufficient for standalone clinical deployment and should be considered supportive rather than definitive for risk stratification in HIV care. Logistic regression and random forest provided the most consistent balance of discrimination and calibration, while complex approaches offered limited gains. Age, sex, viral load, and alcohol use emerged as key predictors. External validation and prospective evaluation are essential to establish generalisability, clinical impact, and feasibility before integration into routine practice.
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.