ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
Interpretable machine learning models for detecting peripheral neuropathy and lower extremity arterial disease in diabetics: an analysis of critical shared and unique risk factors.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence for detection, prediction, and severity classification of diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2026Pooled it
- Advances in the application of artificial intelligence-driven multi-modal imaging technologies in the comprehensive diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2026Review
- Genetic polymorphisms in DNA repair gene XRCC1 and the risk of diabetic polyneuropathy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Precision nutrition in diabetic foot ulcers: multimodal artificial intelligence for personalized metabolic management.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Diabetes Complication Prediction: A Systematic Review of Current Applications and Future Directions.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2025Review
- The application of artificial intelligence models in predicting the risk of diabetic foot: a multicenter study.BioData mining · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence is going to transform the field of endocrinology: an overview.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting moderate-to-severe diabetic foot ulcers in type 2 diabetes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and lower extremity arterial disease (LEAD) are significant contributors to diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs), which severely affect patients' quality of life. This study aimed to develop machine learning (ML) predictive models for DPN and LEAD and to identify both shared and distinct risk factors.
methodsThis retrospective study included 479 diabetic inpatients, of whom 215 were diagnosed with DPN and 69 with LEAD. Clinical data and laboratory results were collected for each patient. Feature selection was performed using three methods: mutual information (MI), random forest recursive feature elimination (RF-RFE), and the Boruta algorithm to identify the most important features. Predictive models were developed using logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), with particle swarm optimization (PSO) used to optimize their hyperparameters. The SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) method was applied to determine the importance of risk factors in the top-performing models.
resultsFor diagnosing DPN, the XGBoost model was most effective, achieving a recall of 83.7%, specificity of 86.8%, accuracy of 85.4%, and an F1 score of 83.7%. On the other hand, the RF model excelled in diagnosing LEAD, with a recall of 85.7%, specificity of 92.9%, accuracy of 91.9%, and an F1 score of 82.8%. SHAP analysis revealed top five critical risk factors shared by DPN and LEAD, including increased urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), serum creatinine (Scr), older age, and carotid stenosis. Additionally, distinct risk factors were pinpointed: decreased serum albumin and lower lymphocyte count were linked to DPN, while elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and higher D-dimer levels were associated with LEAD.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated the effectiveness of ML models in predicting DPN and LEAD in diabetic patients and identified significant risk factors. Focusing on shared risk factors may greatly reduce the prevalence of both conditions, thereby mitigating the risk of developing DFUs.
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.