ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Development and validation of a machine learning-based predictive model for carotid plaque in type 2 diabetes.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Carotid plaque is a critical risk factor for cardiovascular disease and reflects the extent of the atherosclerotic burden. Compared with non-diabetic individuals, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have an elevated likelihood of developing carotid plaques. Consequently, building predictive models tailored to this high-risk population holds significant clinical value for early prevention and management of cardiovascular events. Methods: A total of 2,288 patients were included in this study, 1,716 (75.0%) of whom had plaques detected using ultrasound. Baseline data, including demographic characteristics, medical history, and laboratory indicators, were collected, and seven machine-learning algorithms were applied to establish the prediction model. Feature importance was quantified and presented using Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP). The performance of the model was evaluated using indicators such as area under the curve (AUC-ROC), sensitivity, and specificity. Results: The study showed that The logistic regression model performed the best in terms of discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility. Through SHAP interpretability analysis, key risk factors such as age, body mass index, glycated hemoglobin, history of hypertension, monocyte count, neutrophil percentage, red blood cell count, sex, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and statin use were identified. This study demonstrated that an effective risk-prediction model can be established using conventional clinical variables and machine learning. Conclusions: The developed predictive model can help primary care providers detect patients at heightened risk of carotid atherosclerotic plaques, enabling the delivery of targeted preventive strategies and ultimately improving clinical outcomes.
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.