ArticleScientific reports2025
A novel RFE-GRU model for diabetes classification using PIMA Indian dataset.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integration of Machine Learning With PBPK and QSAR Modeling Approaches to Facilitate Drug Discovery and Development.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2026Review
- Feature reduction using swarm optimization and random forest classifiers for early diabetes risk prediction.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Privacy-Preserving Collaborative Diabetes Prediction in Heterogeneous Health Care Systems: Algorithm Development and Validation of a Secure Federated Ensemble Framework.JMIR diabetes · 2026Article
- A hybrid BiLSTM and rule-based system for integrated diabetes prediction and personalized guidance.PloS one · 2026Article
- A modular deep learning architecture for interpretable disease prediction across tabular clinical and biometric datasets.PloS one · 2026Article
- SMENN-hybrid: an efficient technique combining the synthetic minority oversampling technique with ensemble learning for diabetes prediction.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetes is a long-term condition characterized by elevated blood sugar levels. It can lead to a variety of complex disorders such as stroke, renal failure, and heart attack. Diabetes requires the most machine learning help to diagnose diabetes illness at an early stage, as it cannot be treated and adds significant complications to our health-care system. The diabetes PIMA Indian dataset (PIDD) was used for classification in several studies, it includes 768 instances and 9 features; eight of the features are the predictors, and one feature is the target. Firstly, we performed the preprocessing stage that includes mean imputation and data normalization. Afterwards, we trained the extracted features using various types of Machine Learning (ML); Random Forest (RF), Logistic Regression (LR), K-Nearest neighbor (KNN), Naïve Bayes (NB), Histogram Gradient Boost (HGB), and Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU) models. To achieve the classification for the PIDD, a new model called Recursive Feature Elimination-GRU (RFE-GRU) is proposed in this paper. RFE is vital for selecting features in the training dataset that are most important in predicting the target variable. While the GRU handles the challenge of vanishing and inflating gradient of the features results from RFE. Several predictive evaluation metrics, including precision, recall, F1-score, accuracy, and Area Under the Curve (AUC) achieved 90.50%, 90.70%, 90.50%, 90.70%, 0.9278, respectively, to verify and validate the execution of the RFE-GRU model. The comparative results showed that the RFE-GRU model is better than other classification models.
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.