Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33475518›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021

Risk Stratification for Early Detection of Diabetes and Hypertension in Resource-Limited Settings: Machine Learning Analysis.

Justin J Boutilier, Timothy C Y Chan, Manish Ranjan, Sarang Deo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. 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
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Artificial intelligence in preventive care in primary health care settings: a scoping review.Archives of medical sciences. Atherosclerotic diseases · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Survey and Evaluation of Hypertension Machine Learning Research.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Machine learning for diabetes clinical decision support: a review.Advances in computational intelligence · 2022
    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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Justin J BoutilierDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0904-4467
Timothy C Y ChanDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4128-1692
Manish RanjanNanoHealth, NanoCare Health Services, Hyderabad, India.ORCID 0000-0002-9217-212X
Sarang DeoMax Institute of Healthcare Management, Indian School of Business, Hyderabad, India.ORCID 0000-0002-3233-6014
Indian School of Business · INUniversity of Toronto · CAUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe impending scale up of noncommunicable disease screening programs in low- and middle-income countries coupled with limited health resources require that such programs be as accurate as possible at identifying patients at high risk.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to develop machine learning-based risk stratification algorithms for diabetes and hypertension that are tailored for the at-risk population served by community-based screening programs in low-resource settings.

methodsWe trained and tested our models by using data from 2278 patients collected by community health workers through door-to-door and camp-based screenings in the urban slums of Hyderabad, India between July 14, 2015 and April 21, 2018. We determined the best models for predicting short-term (2-month) risk of diabetes and hypertension (a model for diabetes and a model for hypertension) and compared these models to previously developed risk scores from the United States and the United Kingdom by using prediction accuracy as characterized by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the number of false negatives.

resultsWe found that models based on random forest had the highest prediction accuracy for both diseases and were able to outperform the US and UK risk scores in terms of AUC by 35.5% for diabetes (improvement of 0.239 from 0.671 to 0.910) and 13.5% for hypertension (improvement of 0.094 from 0.698 to 0.792). For a fixed screening specificity of 0.9, the random forest model was able to reduce the expected number of false negatives by 620 patients per 1000 screenings for diabetes and 220 patients per 1000 screenings for hypertension. This improvement reduces the cost of incorrect risk stratification by US $1.99 (or 35%) per screening for diabetes and US $1.60 (or 21%) per screening for hypertension.

conclusionsIn the next decade, health systems in many countries are planning to spend significant resources on noncommunicable disease screening programs and our study demonstrates that machine learning models can be leveraged by these programs to effectively utilize limited resources by improving risk stratification.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusEarly DiagnosisFemaleHumansHypertensionMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk Assessmentdiabetesglobal healthhypertensionmachine learningscreening

Identifiers

PMID33475518
PMCPMC7862003
OpenAlexW3123935279

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.