ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2023
Prediction model for gestational diabetes mellitus using the XG Boost machine learning algorithm.
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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Predictive Performance of Artificial Intelligence Algorithms for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Pregnant Women: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Machine learning prediction models for deep vein thrombosis in hospitalized patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Development and internal validation of a prediction model for healthcare-associated infections in women with gestational diabetes mellitus undergoing delivery.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Obstetrics and Gynecology Nursing: Clinical, Educational, and Ethical Perspectives.Cureus · 2026Review
- Construction of an interpretable machine learning model for predicting gestational diabetes mellitus based on 45 dietary nutrients.BioData mining · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for early prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus and preeclampsia: a systematic review of machine learning models and clinical decision support systems.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Review
- Article
- Review
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Gestational Diabetes Care: A Systematic Review.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2025Review
- Machine learning based model for the early detection of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Multi-transcriptomics analysis of ferroptosis related genes reveals CAFs exosomal COX4I2 as a novel therapeutic target in osteosarcoma.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Article
- Advanced Machine Learning did not Surpass Traditional Logistic Regression in First-Trimester Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Prediction: A Retrospective Single-Center Study From Eastern China.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Development and validation of a prediction model for coronary heart disease risk in depressed patients aged 20 years and older using machine learning algorithms.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.