ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2025
Advanced Machine Learning did not Surpass Traditional Logistic Regression in First-Trimester Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Prediction: A Retrospective Single-Center Study From Eastern China.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Logistic Regression to Foundation Models: Factors Associated With Improved Forecasts.Cureus · 2025Review
- Monitoring OTC drug sales for early detection of respiratory infectious disease outbreaks.Frontiers in public health · 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
Background: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) poses serious health risks to both mothers and fetuses. However, effective tools for identifying GDM are lacking. This study, based on a Chinese cohort, aims to construct and compare the predictive performance of traditional logistic regression (LR) and six advanced machine learning (ML) models, thereby aiding in the early identification and intervention of GDM. Methods: This retrospective study utilized medical examination data from 956 singleton pregnant women collected between January and December 2023 from ten maternal and child health hospitals in Pinghu City. We employed receiver operating characteristic curves and precision-recall curves to assess the predictive performance of the models. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to evaluate clinical utility, while calibration curves and Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) tests were applied to assess the calibration of each model. Results: The 956 participants were randomly divided into a training set and a validation set at a 3:1 ratio. We identified 13 features through Spearman correlation analysis and the Boruta algorithm to construct the models. The LR model exhibited the best AUC at 0.787 (0.723-0.85), outperforming the seven other ML models including RF at 0.776 (0.711-0.841). Furthermore, the LR model showed good calibration and clinical utility. Conclusion: Although ML has tremendous potential, in predicting the occurrence of GDM based on common early pregnancy data, the ML models did not completely outperform the traditional LR model. Simpler, traditional models may be more effective than complex ML approaches.
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.