Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27932531›Full record

ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2017

Development of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Phenotyping Framework Using Expert Knowledge and Machine Learning Approach.

Rina Kagawa, Yoshimasa Kawazoe, Yusuke Ida, Emiko Shinohara, Katsuya Tanaka, Takeshi Imai, Kazuhiko Ohe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Automated Type 2 Diabetes Case and Control Identification from the MIMIC-IV Database.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2023
    Article
  10. Phenotyping in distributed data networks: selecting the right codes for the right patients.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Rina Kagawa1 Department of Biomedical Informatics, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Yoshimasa Kawazoe2 Department of Healthcare Information Management, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Yusuke Ida2 Department of Healthcare Information Management, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Emiko Shinohara2 Department of Healthcare Information Management, The University of Tokyo Hospital, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Katsuya Tanaka1 Department of Biomedical Informatics, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Takeshi Imai3 Center for Disease Biology and Integrative Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Kazuhiko Ohe1 Department of Biomedical Informatics, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhenotyping is an automated technique that can be used to distinguish patients based on electronic health records. To improve the quality of medical care and advance type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) research, the demand for T2DM phenotyping has been increasing. Some existing phenotyping algorithms are not sufficiently accurate for screening or identifying clinical research subjects.

objectiveWe propose a practical phenotyping framework using both expert knowledge and a machine learning approach to develop 2 phenotyping algorithms: one is for screening; the other is for identifying research subjects.

methodsWe employ expert knowledge as rules to exclude obvious control patients and machine learning to increase accuracy for complicated patients. We developed phenotyping algorithms on the basis of our framework and performed binary classification to determine whether a patient has T2DM. To facilitate development of practical phenotyping algorithms, this study introduces new evaluation metrics: area under the precision-sensitivity curve (AUPS) with a high sensitivity and AUPS with a high positive predictive value.

resultsThe proposed phenotyping algorithms based on our framework show higher performance than baseline algorithms. Our proposed framework can be used to develop 2 types of phenotyping algorithms depending on the tuning approach: one for screening, the other for identifying research subjects.

conclusionsWe develop a novel phenotyping framework that can be easily implemented on the basis of proper evaluation metrics, which are in accordance with users' objectives. The phenotyping algorithms based on our framework are useful for extraction of T2DM patients in retrospective studies.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsSupport Vector MachineArea Under CurveDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansPhenotypeROC CurveSensitivity and Specificityphenotypingpositive predictive value (PPV)sensitivitysupport vector machine (SVM)type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)

Identifiers

PMID27932531
PMCPMC5588819

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.