ArticleCanadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique2026
Machine learning used to study risk factors for chronic diseases: A scoping review.
Article in Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique, 2026. 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.
- Using Interpretable Machine Learning with SHAP to Assess Dynapenic Abdominal Obesity as a Stroke Risk Predictor: A Prospective Cohort Study.Vascular health and risk management · 2026Article
- Machine Learning Applications in Population and Public Health: Guidelines for Development, Testing, and Implementation.JMIR public health and surveillance · 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
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesMachine learning (ML) has received significant attention for its potential to process and learn from vast amounts of data. Our aim was to perform a scoping review to identify studies that used ML to study risk factors for chronic diseases at a population level, notably those that incorporated methods to mitigate algorithmic bias. We focused on ML applications for the most common risk factors for chronic disease: tobacco use, alcohol use, unhealthy eating, physical activity, and psychological stress.
methodsWe searched the peer-reviewed, indexed literature using Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Ovid), Scopus, ACM Digital Library, INSPEC, and Web of Science's Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index, and Emerging Sources Citation Index. Among the included studies, we examined whether bias was considered and identified strategies employed to mitigate bias. SYNTHESIS: The search identified 10,329 studies, and 20 met our inclusion criteria. The studies we identified used ML for a wide range of goals, from prediction of chronic disease development to automating the classification of data to identifying new associations between risk factors and disease. Nine studies (45%) included some discussion of algorithmic bias. Studies that incorporated a broad array of sociodemographic variables did so primarily to improve the performance of a ML model rather than to mitigate potential harms to populations made vulnerable by social and economic policies.
conclusionThis work contributes to our understanding of how ML can be used to advance population and public health.
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.