ArticleHealth science reports2025
Predictive Modeling of Weight Loss and Metabolic Health Outcomes: A Retrospective Predictive Modeling Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Predictive Modeling of Weight Loss and Metabolic Health Outcomes: A Retrospective Predictive Modeling Study.Health science 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
Background: Obesity is a chronic, complicated, and progressive disease that significantly affects mortality, quality of life, and overall health in nearly 13% of the adult population worldwide. Thus, solutions like a hypocaloric diet with a Mediterranean diet pattern aim to control this and other metabolic problems. Objectives: This study developed and measured the performance of different machine learning (ML) models designed to predict body weight loss and/or metabolic syndrome (MetS) change after a 3-month hypocaloric diet with a Mediterranean pattern in obesity-diagnosed patients. Methods: The data set was provided by a clinical trial of 893 obese patients. Five machine learning architectures were implemented: Logistic Regression, Decision Tree Classifier, Random Forest Classifier, eXtreme Gradient Boosting Classifier (XGBoost), and Support Vector Classifier. Performance metrics such as accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and ROC curve were used to assess the prediction models. The influence of the predictors was also evaluated in every case. Results: For body weight loss prediction, Stacking and Random Forest models outperformed the other models, with accuracies of 81.37% and 76.44% and AUC of 86.79% (95% CI: 82.9%-90.4%) and 86.25% (95% CI: 82.3%-89.9%), respectively. For MetS change, Stacking had the best performance, with an accuracy of 85.90% and an AUC of 83.65% (95% CI: 76.9%-89.8%). For the prediction model of body weight loss and MetS change, Stacking was the best algorithm, with an accuracy of 94.74% and an AUC of 95.35% (95% CI: 88.7%-99.9%). Furthermore, variables associated with metabolic and inflammatory markers exhibited stronger correlations with the outcomes. Conclusion: Machine learning models, especially ensemble methods like Stacking and XGBoost, effectively predict body weight loss and MetS improvement in obese patients following a Mediterranean diet. Key predictors include age, insulin resistance markers, and inflammatory biomarkers. Integrating these predictive tools can significantly enhance personalized dietary interventions, optimizing treatment outcomes in clinical practice.
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.