Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36466490›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Development and assessment of novel machine learning models to predict medication non-adherence risks in type 2 diabetics.

Mengting Li, Xiangyu Lu, HengBo Yang, Rong Yuan, Yong Yang, Rongsheng Tong, Xingwei Wu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Artificial Intelligence to Diagnose Complications of Diabetes.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mengting LiPersonalized Drug Therapy Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Department of Pharmacy, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Xiangyu LuChinese Academy of Sciences Sichuan Translational Medicine Research Hospital, Chengdu, China.
HengBo YangSchool of Pharmacy, Chengdu Medical College, Chengdu, China.
Rong YuanChinese Academy of Sciences Sichuan Translational Medicine Research Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Yong YangPersonalized Drug Therapy Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Department of Pharmacy, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Rongsheng TongPersonalized Drug Therapy Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Department of Pharmacy, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Xingwei WuPersonalized Drug Therapy Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Department of Pharmacy, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CNChengdu Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Medication adherence is the main determinant of effective management of type 2 diabetes, yet there is no gold standard method available to screen patients with high-risk non-adherence. Developing machine learning models to predict high-risk non-adherence in patients with T2D could optimize management. Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out on patients with T2D at the Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital from April 2018 to December 2019 who were examined for HbA1c on the day of the survey. Demographic and clinical characteristics were extracted from the questionnaire and electronic medical records. The sample was randomly divided into a training dataset and a test dataset with a radio of 8:2 after data preprocessing. Four imputing methods, five sampling methods, three screening methods, and 18 machine learning algorithms were used to groom data and develop and validate models. Bootstrapping was performed to generate the validation set for external validation and univariate analysis. Models were compared on the basis of predictive performance metrics. Finally, we validated the sample size on the best model. Results: This study included 980 patients with T2D, of whom 184 (18.8%) were defined as medication non-adherence. The results indicated that the model used modified random forest as the imputation method, random under sampler as the sampling method, Boruta as the feature screening method and the ensemble algorithms and had the best performance. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), F1 score, and area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of the best model, among a total of 1,080 trained models, were 0.8369, 0.7912, and 0.9574, respectively. Age, present fasting blood glucose (FBG) values, present HbA1c values, present random blood glucose (RBG) values, and body mass index (BMI) were the most significant contributors associated with risks of medication adherence. Conclusion: We found that machine learning methods could be used to predict the risk of non-adherence in patients with T2D. The proposed model was well performed to identify patients with T2D with non-adherence and could help improve individualized T2D management.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Blood GlucoseCross-Sectional StudiesGlycated HemoglobinHumansMachine LearningMedication AdherenceBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinensemble modelmachine learningmedication adherenceprediction modelT2D

Identifiers

PMID36466490
PMCPMC9714465
OpenAlexW4309613825

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.