Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36967760›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2023

Prediction model for gestational diabetes mellitus using the XG Boost machine learning algorithm.

Xiaoqi Hu, Xiaolin Hu, Ya Yu, Jia Wang

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Artificial Intelligence in Gestational Diabetes Care: A Systematic Review.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors.

Xiaoqi HuDepartment of Nursing, Yantian District People's Hospital, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
Xiaolin HuSchool of Basic Medical Sciences, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Ya YuDepartment of Nursing, Guangzhou First People's Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Jia WangDepartment of Nursing, Shenzhen Hospital of Southern Medical University, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To develop the extreme gradient boosting (XG Boost) machine learning (ML) model for predicting gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) compared with a model using the traditional logistic regression (LR) method. Methods: A case-control study was carried out among pregnant women, who were assigned to either the training set (these women were recruited from August 2019 to November 2019) or the testing set (these women were recruited in August 2020). We applied the XG Boost ML model approach to identify the best set of predictors out of a set of 33 variables. The performance of the prediction model was determined by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) to assess discrimination, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) test and calibration plots to assess calibration. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was introduced to evaluate the clinical use of each of the models. Results: A total of 735 and 190 pregnant women were included in the training and testing sets, respectively. The XG Boost ML model, which included 20 predictors, resulted in an AUC of 0.946 and yielded a predictive accuracy of 0.875, whereas the model using a traditional LR included four predictors and presented an AUC of 0.752 and yielded a predictive accuracy of 0.786. The HL test and calibration plots show that the two models have good calibration. DCA indicated that treating only those women whom the XG Boost ML model predicts are at risk of GDM confers a net benefit compared with treating all women or treating none. Conclusions: The established model using XG Boost ML showed better predictive ability than the traditional LR model in terms of discrimination. The calibration performance of both models was good.

Indexed as

Diabetes, GestationalAlgorithmsCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMachine LearningPregnancyextreme gradient boostinggestational diabetes mellituslogistic regressionmachine learningprediction model

Identifiers

PMID36967760
PMCPMC10034315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read85
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.