Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35885524›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Comparison between Machine Learning and Multiple Linear Regression to Identify Abnormal Thallium Myocardial Perfusion Scan in Chinese Type 2 Diabetes.

Jiunn-Diann Lin, Dee Pei, Fang-Yu Chen, Chung-Ze Wu, Chieh-Hua Lu, Li-Ying Huang, Chun-Heng Kuo, Shi-Wen Kuo, Yen-Lin Chen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jiunn-Diann LinDivision of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City 23651, Taiwan.
Dee PeiSchool of Medicine, College of Medicine, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei 24205, Taiwan.
Fang-Yu ChenSchool of Medicine, College of Medicine, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei 24205, Taiwan.
Chung-Ze WuDivision of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City 23651, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-6118-6070
Chieh-Hua LuDivision of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Tri-Service General Hospital, School of Medicine, National Defense Medical Center, No. 325. Sec. 2, Chenggong Rd., Neihu District, Taipei City 11490, Taiwan.
Li-Ying HuangSchool of Medicine, College of Medicine, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei 24205, Taiwan.
Chun-Heng KuoSchool of Medicine, College of Medicine, Fu Jen Catholic University, New Taipei 24205, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0001-7673-3567
Shi-Wen KuoDivision of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, No. 289, Jianguo Rd., Xindian Dist., New Taipei City 23142, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-0051-2407
Yen-Lin ChenDepartment of Pathology, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, No. 325. Sec. 2, Chenggong Rd., Neihu District, Taipei City 11490, Taiwan.
Fu Jen Catholic University · TWTaipei Medical University-Shuang Ho Hospital · TWTri-Service General Hospital · TWTaipei Tzu Chi Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients have a high risk of coronary artery disease (CAD). Thallium-201 myocardial perfusion scan (Th-201 scan) is a non-invasive and extensively used tool in recognizing CAD in clinical settings. In this study, we attempted to compare the predictive accuracy of evaluating abnormal Th-201 scans using traditional multiple linear regression (MLR) with four machine learning (ML) methods. From the study, we can determine whether ML surpasses traditional MLR and rank the clinical variables and compare them with previous reports.In total, 796 T2DM, including 368 men and 528 women, were enrolled. In addition to traditional MLR, classification and regression tree (CART), random forest (RF), stochastic gradient boosting (SGB) and eXtreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) were also used to analyze abnormal Th-201 scans. Stress sum score was used as the endpoint (dependent variable). Our findings show that all four root mean square errors of ML are smaller than with MLR, which implies that ML is more precise than MLR in determining abnormal Th-201 scans by using clinical parameters. The first seven factors, from the most important to the least are:body mass index, hemoglobin, age, glycated hemoglobin, Creatinine, systolic and diastolic blood pressure. In conclusion, ML is not inferior to traditional MLR in predicting abnormal Th-201 scans, and the most important factors are body mass index, hemoglobin, age, glycated hemoglobin, creatinine, systolic and diastolic blood pressure. ML methods are superior in these kinds of studies.

Indexed as

coronary artery diseasemachine learningthallium-201 myocardial perfusion scantype 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID35885524
PMCPMC9324130
OpenAlexW4283803068

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.