ArticlePloS one2022
A novel method to derive personalized minimum viable recommendations for type 2 diabetes prevention based on counterfactual explanations.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Data, Process, and Data-Driven Representations of Digital Twins in Diabetes: Scoping Review.JMIR diabetes · 2026Review
- Two Machine-learning Hybrid Models for Predicting Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Journal of medical signals and sensors · 2025Article
- Characterization of Inclination Analysis for Predicting Onset of Heart Failure from Primary Care Electronic Medical Records.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the growing availability of artificial intelligence models for predicting type 2 diabetes, there is still a lack of personalized approaches to quantify minimum viable changes in biomarkers that may help reduce the individual risk of developing disease. The aim of this article is to develop a new method, based on counterfactual explanations, to generate personalized recommendations to reduce the one-year risk of type 2 diabetes. Ten routinely collected biomarkers extracted from Electronic Medical Records of 2791 patients at low risk and 2791 patients at high risk of type 2 diabetes were analyzed. Two regions characterizing the two classes of patients were estimated using a Support Vector Data Description classifier. Counterfactual explanations (i.e., minimal changes in input features able to change the risk class) were generated for patients at high risk and evaluated using performance metrics (availability, validity, actionability, similarity, and discriminative power) and a qualitative survey administered to seven expert clinicians. Results showed that, on average, the requested minimum viable changes implied a significant reduction of fasting blood sugar, systolic blood pressure, and triglycerides and a significant increase of high-density lipoprotein in patients at risk of diabetes. A significant reduction in body mass index was also recommended in most of the patients at risk, except in females without hypertension. In general, greater changes were recommended in hypertensive patients compared to non-hypertensive ones. The experts were overall satisfied with the proposed approach although in some cases the proposed recommendations were deemed insufficient to reduce the risk in a clinically meaningful way. Future research will focus on a larger set of biomarkers and different comorbidities, also incorporating clinical guidelines whenever possible. Development of additional mathematical and clinical validation approaches will also be of paramount importance.
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.