Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36361161›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Accuracy of Machine Learning Classification Models for the Prediction of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Survey and Meta-Analysis Approach.

Micheal O Olusanya, Ropo Ebenezer Ogunsakin, Meenu Ghai, Matthew Adekunle Adeleke

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Micheal O OlusanyaDepartment of Computer Science and Information Technology, Sol Plaatje University, Kimberley 8300, South Africa.
Ropo Ebenezer OgunsakinBiostatistics Unit, Discipline of Public Health Medicine, School of Nursing & Public Health, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4000, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-3853-3382
Meenu GhaiDiscipline of Genetics, School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4000, South Africa.
Matthew Adekunle AdelekeDiscipline of Genetics, School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4000, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-3271-8442
University of KwaZulu-Natal · ZASol Plaatje University · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Soft-computing and statistical learning models have gained substantial momentum in predicting type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) disease. This paper reviews recent soft-computing and statistical learning models in T2DM using a meta-analysis approach. We searched for papers using soft-computing and statistical learning models focused on T2DM published between 2010 and 2021 on three different search engines. Of 1215 studies identified, 34 with 136952 patients met our inclusion criteria. The pooled algorithm's performance was able to predict T2DM with an overall accuracy of 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI] of [0.82, 0.89]). The classification of diabetes prediction was significantly greater in models with a screening and diagnosis (pooled proportion [95% CI] = 0.91 [0.74, 0.97]) when compared to models with nephropathy (pooled proportion = 0.48 [0.76, 0.89] to 0.88 [0.83, 0.91]). For the prediction of T2DM, the decision trees (DT) models had a pooled accuracy of 0.88 [95% CI: 0.82, 0.92], and the neural network (NN) models had a pooled accuracy of 0.85 [95% CI: 0.79, 0.89]. Meta-regression did not provide any statistically significant findings for the heterogeneous accuracy in studies with different diabetes predictions, sample sizes, and impact factors. Additionally, ML models showed high accuracy for the prediction of T2DM. The predictive accuracy of ML algorithms in T2DM is promising, mainly through DT and NN models. However, there is heterogeneity among ML models. We compared the results and models and concluded that this evidence might help clinicians interpret data and implement optimum models for their dataset for T2DM prediction.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2AlgorithmsHumansMachine LearningMass Screeningdiagnosismeta-analysispredictive modelssoft computingtype 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID36361161
PMCPMC9655196
OpenAlexW4307990043

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.