ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2019
A data-driven approach to predicting diabetes and cardiovascular disease with machine learning.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 166 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
166 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Machine learning and artificial intelligence in type 2 diabetes prediction: a comprehensive 33-year bibliometric and literature analysis.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Pooled it
- Cardiovascular complications in a diabetes prediction model using machine learning: a systematic review.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Prediction of individual weight loss using supervised learning: findings from the CALERIEThe American journal of clinical nutrition · 2024Trial
- Article
- Data-driven subgroups for 3-year risk stratification of incident diabetes and complications in diabetes-free Chinese adults.Chinese medical journal · 2026Article
- Divide and recombine approaches for fitting logistic regression to large-scale health surveillance data: application to diabetes risk prediction in BRFSS.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Metabolic syndrome and a broken heart: trust your gut or risk your heart.American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology · 2026Review
- An interpretable weighted ensemble based on routinely collected clinical data for the accurate prediction of axillary lymph node metastasis.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Explainable machine learning models for early prediction of acute kidney injury after cardiac surgery.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Explainable machine learning for long-term cardiovascular disease risk prediction in Chinese middle-aged and older adults: a 9-year longitudinal cohort study with web-based risk calculator.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Unveiling the heterogeneity of T2DM: a narrative review of clustering algorithms in stratifying comorbidity and complication risk.Cardiovascular diabetology. Endocrinology reports · 2026Review
- Web-based cardiovascular disease risk prediction using machine learning.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- A new extended belief rule base method based on neighborhood covering reduction for diabetes diagnosis.PloS one · 2026Article
- A digital twin framework for predicting and simulating type 2 diabetes onset using retrospective lifestyle data.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based prediction of in-hospital mortality in patients with decompensated heart failure using the Charlson Comorbidity Index.SAGE open medicine · 2026Article
- Integrating Artificial Intelligence Into Digital Health-Optimized Therapeutics for the Remote Cardiac Rehabilitation.Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology · 2026Review
- Do nutritional variables improve cardiovascular disease prediction? A comparative machine learning analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Quantifying the imputation paradox and XAI inconsistency in multi-source diabetes prediction: a 353,680-record leakage-free stacking ensemble with dynamic routing architecture.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Machine learning models for chronic disease risks using complex survey data: the impact of sample weights.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
106 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
backgroundDiabetes and cardiovascular disease are two of the main causes of death in the United States. Identifying and predicting these diseases in patients is the first step towards stopping their progression. We evaluate the capabilities of machine learning models in detecting at-risk patients using survey data (and laboratory results), and identify key variables within the data contributing to these diseases among the patients.
methodsOur research explores data-driven approaches which utilize supervised machine learning models to identify patients with such diseases. Using the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) dataset, we conduct an exhaustive search of all available feature variables within the data to develop models for cardiovascular, prediabetes, and diabetes detection. Using different time-frames and feature sets for the data (based on laboratory data), multiple machine learning models (logistic regression, support vector machines, random forest, and gradient boosting) were evaluated on their classification performance. The models were then combined to develop a weighted ensemble model, capable of leveraging the performance of the disparate models to improve detection accuracy. Information gain of tree-based models was used to identify the key variables within the patient data that contributed to the detection of at-risk patients in each of the diseases classes by the data-learned models.
resultsThe developed ensemble model for cardiovascular disease (based on 131 variables) achieved an Area Under - Receiver Operating Characteristics (AU-ROC) score of 83.1% using no laboratory results, and 83.9% accuracy with laboratory results. In diabetes classification (based on 123 variables), eXtreme Gradient Boost (XGBoost) model achieved an AU-ROC score of 86.2% (without laboratory data) and 95.7% (with laboratory data). For pre-diabetic patients, the ensemble model had the top AU-ROC score of 73.7% (without laboratory data), and for laboratory based data XGBoost performed the best at 84.4%. Top five predictors in diabetes patients were 1) waist size, 2) age, 3) self-reported weight, 4) leg length, and 5) sodium intake. For cardiovascular diseases the models identified 1) age, 2) systolic blood pressure, 3) self-reported weight, 4) occurrence of chest pain, and 5) diastolic blood pressure as key contributors.
conclusionWe conclude machine learned models based on survey questionnaire can provide an automated identification mechanism for patients at risk of diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. We also identify key contributors to the prediction, which can be further explored for their implications on electronic health records.
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.