Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30459809›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2018

Predicting Diabetes Mellitus With Machine Learning Techniques.

Quan Zou, Kaiyang Qu, Yamei Luo, Dehui Yin, Ying Ju, Hua Tang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 179 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
179citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

179 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

119 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Quan ZouSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China.
Kaiyang QuSchool of Computer Science and Technology, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China.
Yamei LuoSchool of Medical Information and Engineering, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.
Dehui YinSchool of Medical Information and Engineering, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.
Ying JuSchool of Information Science and Technology, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China.
Hua TangDepartment of Pathophysiology, School of Basic Medicine, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease characterized by hyperglycemia. It may cause many complications. According to the growing morbidity in recent years, in 2040, the world's diabetic patients will reach 642 million, which means that one of the ten adults in the future is suffering from diabetes. There is no doubt that this alarming figure needs great attention. With the rapid development of machine learning, machine learning has been applied to many aspects of medical health. In this study, we used decision tree, random forest and neural network to predict diabetes mellitus. The dataset is the hospital physical examination data in Luzhou, China. It contains 14 attributes. In this study, five-fold cross validation was used to examine the models. In order to verity the universal applicability of the methods, we chose some methods that have the better performance to conduct independent test experiments. We randomly selected 68994 healthy people and diabetic patients' data, respectively as training set. Due to the data unbalance, we randomly extracted 5 times data. And the result is the average of these five experiments. In this study, we used principal component analysis (PCA) and minimum redundancy maximum relevance (mRMR) to reduce the dimensionality. The results showed that prediction with random forest could reach the highest accuracy (ACC = 0.8084) when all the attributes were used.

Indexed as

decision treediabetes mellitusfeature rankingmachine learningneural networkrandom forest

Identifiers

PMID30459809
PMCPMC6232260

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.