ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2024
An explainable analysis of diabetes mellitus using statistical and artificial intelligence techniques.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Optimized and Explainable Machine Learning Framework for Diabetes Prediction Using Marine Predators Algorithm and SHAP.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Machine learning screening of risk factors for diabetic microvascular complications and construction of a gradient boosting decision tree predictive model.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Federated multimodal AI for precision-equitable diabetes care.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
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
Abstract
backgroundDiabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic disease prevalent worldwide, requiring a multifaceted analytical approach to improve early detection and subsequent mitigation of morbidity and mortality rates. This research aimed to develop an explainable analysis of DM by combining sociodemographic and clinical data with statistical and artificial intelligence (AI) techniques.
methodsLeveraging a small dataset that includes sociodemographic and clinical profiles of diabetic and non-diabetic individuals, we employed a diverse set of statistical and AI models for predictive purposes and assessment of DM risk factors. The statistical tests used were Student's t-test and Chi-square, while the AI techniques were fuzzy cognitive maps (FCM), artificial neural networks (ANN), support vector machines (SVM), and XGBoost.
resultsOur statistical models facilitated an in-depth exploration of variable associations, while the resulting AI models demonstrated exceptional efficacy in DM classification. In particular, the XGBoost model showed superior performance in accuracy, sensitivity and specificity with values of 1 for each of these metrics. On the other hand, the FCM stood out for its explainability capabilities by allowing an analysis of the variables involved in the prediction using scenario-based simulations.
conclusionsAn integrated analysis of DM using a variety of methodologies is critical for timely detection of the disease and informed clinical decision-making.
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.