ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Objective tongue phenotyping identifies phenotypic heterogeneity in diabetic kidney disease: a dual-center clustering analysis.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To identify tongue-phenotype subtypes in patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD) using unsupervised clustering of quantified tongue features, and to compare tongue characteristics and laboratory profiles across subtypes. Methods: We enrolled 331 patients with DKD from two hospitals in Beijing. Forty-eight continuous tongue features and 3 ordinal/categorical tongue variables were extracted. Continuous variables were z-score standardized. The optimal number of clusters was determined using the elbow method, silhouette width, and gap statistic. K-means clustering was used as the primary analysis, Ward.D2 hierarchical clustering was applied for robustness validation, and partitioning around medoids (PAM) was additionally used in sensitivity analyses. Agreement between methods was assessed by the adjusted Rand index (ARI) and maximum overlap consistency. Tongue features, 40 laboratory variables, and 7 composite indices were compared between subtypes, with Benjamini-Hochberg (BH) correction applied for multiple testing. Results: Integrating the elbow method, silhouette width, gap statistic, and interpretability, k = 2 was selected. K-means identified Cluster 1 (n = 108, 32.6%) and Cluster 2 (n = 223, 67.4%), with high concordance to hierarchical clustering (maximum overlap consistency, 92.4%; ARI, 0.715). Thirty-nine of 48 continuous tongue features remained significant after correction. Cluster 2 showed higher brightness, lower saturation, a lower coating ratio, thicker coating, and more tooth marks, whereas Cluster 1 showed darker tongue color, higher saturation, more yellow coating, and milder thickness. Coating thickness grade and tooth marks differed significantly between clusters, but fissures did not. No laboratory or composite index differed significantly after multiple imputation and BH correction. Conclusions: Objective tongue phenotyping identified two reproducible DKD subtypes. Tongue-based heterogeneity did not overlap with conventional laboratory profiles, suggesting complementary value for precision syndrome differentiation in DKD.
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.