ArticleScientific reports2025
AI-optimized GRU-based self-attention model for predictive diabetes staging in IoT healthcare 5.0.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. 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.
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2026-06-16Concerns/Issues about Data · Investigation by Third Party · Objections by Author(s) · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the Healthcare 5.0 environment, the IoT devices are used for collecting the users statics. Hence, IoT devices can be used for the early detection and staging of diabetes. However, due to the complex interrelationship among the healthcare feature-set it is difficult to do an accurate prediction. In this context, this paper presents self-attention GRU model for predictive diabetes detection. A GRU-based self-attention mechanism captures temporal dependencies and spatial features that improves the model performance. Finally, CNN with Batch Normalization and ReLU performs the final classification. Experimental results show that the model achieved 93.94% accuracy, 95.28% precision, 93.94% recall, and an AUC of 0.9697, outperforming GRU, LSTM, RNN, and transformer-based baselines.
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.