Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35399848›Full record

ArticleJournal of healthcare engineering2022

Comparison of Different Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Diabetic Kidney Disease.

Satish Kumar David, Mohamed Rafiullah, Khalid Siddiqui

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of healthcare engineering, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

3 authors.

Satish Kumar DavidStrategic Center for Diabetes Research, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-5757-1822
Mohamed RafiullahStrategic Center for Diabetes Research, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-0583-3901
Khalid SiddiquiStrategic Center for Diabetes Research, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-4860-1262

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Diabetic kidney disease (DKD), one of the complications of diabetes in patients, leads to progressive loss of kidney function. Timely intervention is known to improve outcomes. Therefore, screening patients to identify high-risk populations is important. Machine learning classification techniques can be applied to patient datasets to identify high-risk patients by building a predictive model. Objective: This study aims to identify a suitable classification technique for predicting DKD by applying different classification techniques to a DKD dataset and comparing their performance using WEKA machine learning software. Methods: The performance of nine different classification techniques was analyzed on a DKD dataset with 410 instances and 18 attributes. Data preprocessing was carried out using the PartitionMembershipFilter. A 10-fold cross validation was performed on the dataset. The performance was assessed on the basis of the execution time, accuracy, correctly and incorrectly classified instances, kappa statistics (K), mean absolute error, root mean squared error, and true values of the confusion matrix. Results: With an accuracy of 93.6585% and a higher K value (0.8731), IBK and random tree classification techniques were found to be the best performing techniques. Moreover, they also exhibited the lowest root mean squared error rate (0.2496). There were 15 false-positive instances and 11 false-negative instances with these prediction models. Conclusions: This study identified IBK and random tree classification techniques as the best performing classifiers and accurate prediction methods for DKD.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusDiabetic NephropathiesHumansMachine LearningRisk FactorsSoftware

Identifiers

PMID35399848
PMCPMC8993553

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.