ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Predicting metabolic syndrome in adolescents from device-measured 24-h movement behaviors: a machine learning approach.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
Objective: To develop and internally evaluate a non-invasive machine-learning model for identifying metabolic syndrome (MS) in adolescents using 24-h movement behaviors and non-invasively measured physical characteristics. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 822 adolescents aged 12-15 years recruited in Tianjin, China, from September 2023 to September 2025. Movement behaviors were assessed using ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometers, body composition was measured using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and MS was diagnosed according to the 2007 International Diabetes Federation criteria. LASSO regression was used for feature selection, and 13 machine-learning algorithms were compared. SMOTETomek was used during model development to address class imbalance. Performance was evaluated using stratified five-fold cross-validation and a held-out internal test set. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) were used to interpret model predictions. Results: LASSO retained eight predictors: waist circumference, body fat percentage (FAT%), weight, age, moderate physical activity (MPA), vigorous physical activity, sleep duration, and sex. Extra Trees achieved the best cross-validation performance, with a mean AUC of 0.749 (SD, 0.043) and an F1 score of 0.798 (SD, 0.028). Its relative advantage may reflect the ability of randomized tree ensembles to capture nonlinear relationships and feature interactions while reducing variance through aggregation. In the held-out internal test set, the model achieved an AUC of 0.864, accuracy of 92.02%, specificity of 93.33%, and sensitivity of 76.92%. The lower sensitivity relative to accuracy and specificity indicates that some adolescents with MS may remain undetected. SHAP ranked FAT% as the most influential predictor (mean absolute SHAP value, 0.08) and MPA as the leading movement-behavior predictor (0.04), thereby improving the transparency of model predictions. Conclusions: The Extra Trees model showed moderate cross-validation discrimination and stronger performance in the internal test set, although this difference warrants cautious interpretation. SHAP improved model transparency by identifying FAT% and MPA as influential predictors. Multicenter external validation and feasibility assessment are required before large-scale screening.
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.