ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2023
Development and visualization of a risk prediction model for metabolic syndrome: a longitudinal cohort study based on health check-up data in China.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A body roundness index (BRI)-based predictive model for metabolic syndrome in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women-from a cross-sectional machine learning study to a longitudinal dynamic assessment.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Integrating dietary patterns and metabolomics with machine learning for metabolic syndrome risk assessment in a rural population.NPJ science of food · 2026Article
- Machine learning ensemble meets clinical practice: developing a real-world risk prediction model for metabolic syndrome using super learner and scorecard approaches.Journal of advanced research · 2026Article
- Effect of visceral fat on onset of metabolic syndrome.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Our study aimed to construct a practical risk prediction model for metabolic syndrome (MetS) based on the longitudinal health check-up data, considering both the baseline level of physical examination indicators and their annual average cumulative exposure, and to provide some theoretical basis for the health management of Mets. Methods: The prediction model was constructed in male and female cohorts, separately. The shared set of predictive variables screened out from 49 important physical examination indicators by the univariate Cox model, Lasso-Cox model and the RSF algorithm collectively was further screened by Cox stepwise regression method. The screened predictors were used to construct prediction model by the Cox proportional hazards regression model and RSF model, respectively. Subsequently, the better method would be selected to develop final MetS predictive model according to comprehensive comparison and evaluation. Finally, the optimal model was validated internally and externally by the time-dependent ROC curve (tdROC) and concordance indexes (C-indexes). The constructed predictive model was converted to a web-based prediction calculator using the "shiny" package of the R4.2.1 software. Results: A total of 15 predictors were screened in the male cohort and 9 predictors in the female cohort. In both male and female cohorts, the prediction error curve of the RSF model was consistently lower than that of the Cox proportional hazards regression model, and the integrated Brier score (IBS) of the RSF model was smaller, therefore, the RSF model was used to develop the final prediction model. Internal validation of the RSF model showed that the area under the curve (AUC) of tdROC for 1 year, 3 years and 5 years in the male cohort were 0.979, 0.991, and 0.983, and AUCs in the female cohort were 0.959, 0.975, and 0.978, respectively, the C-indexes calculated by 500 bootstraps of the male and female cohort RSF models are above 0.7. The external validation also showed that the model has good predictive ability. Conclusion: The risk predictive model for MetS constructed by RSF in this study is more stable and reliable than Cox proportional hazards regression model, and the model based on multiple screening of routine physical examination indicators has performed well in both internal and external data, and has certain clinical application value.
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.