ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2020
Simple Linear Support Vector Machine Classifier Can Distinguish Impaired Glucose Tolerance Versus Type 2 Diabetes Using a Reduced Set of CGM-Based Glycemic Variability Indices.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Very Low-Carbohydrate Breakfast Intervention for Adults with Type 2 Diabetes and Persistent Hyperglycemia: Protocol for a Digital, Nonrandomized Pre-Post Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Prediabetes: A Scoping Review.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2025Review
- Enhancing Predictive Power: Integrating a Linear Support Vector Classifier with Logistic Regression for Patient Outcome Prognosis in Virtual Reality Therapy for Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Diabetes Technology Meeting 2021.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2022Article
- Analysis of detrended fluctuation function derived from continuous glucose monitoring may assist in distinguishing latent autoimmune diabetes in adults from T2DM.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
- Bioinformatic Reconstruction and Analysis of Gene Networks Related to Glucose Variability in Diabetes and Its Complications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- Computer-Aided Detection of Incidental Lumbar Spine Fractures from Routine Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) Studies Using a Support Vector Machine (SVM) Classifier.Journal of digital imaging · 2020Article
- Integration of SNP Disease Association, eQTL, and Enrichment Analyses to Identify Risk SNPs and Susceptibility Genes in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.BioMed research international · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany glycemic variability (GV) indices exist in the literature. In previous works, we demonstrated that a set of GV indices, extracted from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data, can distinguish between stages of diabetes progression. We showed that 25 indices driving a logistic regression classifier can differentiate between healthy and nonhealthy individuals; whereas 37 GV indices and four individual parameters, feeding a polynomial-kernel support vector machine (SVM), can further distinguish between impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). The latter approach has some limitations to interpretability (complex model, extensive index pool). In this article, we try to obtain the same performance with a simpler classifier and a parsimonious subset of indices.
methodsWe analyzed the data of 62 subjects with IGT or T2D. We selected 17 interpretable GV indices and four parameters (age, sex, BMI, waist circumference). We trained a SVM on the data of a baseline visit and tested it on the follow-up visit, comparing the results with the state-of-art methods.
resultsThe linear SVM fed by a reduced subset of 17 GV indices and four basic parameters achieved 82.3% accuracy, only marginally worse than the reference 87.1% (41-features polynomial-kernel SVM). Cross-validation accuracies were comparable (69.6% vs 72.5%).
conclusionThe proposed SVM fed by 17 GV indices and four parameters can differentiate between IGT and T2D. Using a simpler model and a parsimonious set of indices caused only a slight accuracy deterioration, with significant advantages in terms of interpretability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.