ArticleScientific reports2025
Enhanced diabetes prediction using CTGAN-MLP approach on body composition data.
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 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate diabetes risk prediction is essential for timely intervention and effective disease management. To address these issues, this study evaluates a prediction framework that incorporates Conditional Tabular Generative Adversarial Network (CTGAN) to generate additional synthetic samples and mitigate class imbalance. Unlike interpolation-based oversampling techniques, CTGAN models the underlying data distribution and may better preserve nonlinear relationships among body composition variables. When combined with a Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), this approach enables the model to capture complex feature interactions that could be relevant for distinguishing individuals with diabetes from healthy participants. In our experiments, the CTGAN-augmented MLP achieved an accuracy of 93.91%, an AUC of 93.87%, a precision of 94.48%, and an F1-score of 93.89% under stratified 5-fold cross-validation, representing the highest performance among the evaluated models. The SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was further employed to enhance interpretability and provided insight into the contribution of key predictors such as fat percentage, fat-free mass, and basal metabolic rate.
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.