ArticleDiabetology & metabolic syndrome2025
Feasibility of AI-simulated patients for tailored selection of diabetes remission prediction models in metabolic bariatric surgery: a proof-of-concept study.
Article in Diabetology & metabolic syndrome, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
aimsThis proof-of-concept study aims to demonstrate the feasibility of using AI-Simulated Patients (ASPs) to test and illustrate the tailored selection of diabetes remission prediction models.
methodsWe created five initial ASPs representing diverse T2DM cases, each with key clinical parameters, then expanded to 100 ASPs as a convenience sample. Using a standardized process, GPT-4 applied six validated diabetes remission prediction models: DiaRem, A-DiaRem, ABCD, IMS, DiaBetter, and DRI. For each case, GPT-4 assessed input availability, estimated remission scores, discussed model strengths/limitations, and recommended the best-fit tool. Human experts supervised all outputs to ensure accuracy, reliability, and appropriate model selection for each ASP. Exact ranges and distributions were anchored in reported epidemiology of bariatric patient populations (e.g., age 18-70 years, BMI 30-65 kg/m², HbA1c 6-11%, C-peptide 0.2-5 ng/mL) with variability introduced for diversity. Sample size (n = 100) was chosen for breadth of illustration rather than statistical power.
resultsWe applied a refined, criteria-based algorithm to 100 ASPs representing diverse T2DM cases considered for metabolic/bariatric surgery. Model selection incorporated key inputs, planned procedure, and model validation scope. The DRI was most common, followed by DiaBetter, ABCD Score, Advanced DiaRem, and IMS Score. Each recommendation reflected surgical type and data completeness. The resulting decision-making algorithm illustrates a reproducible methodology that may support future tailored application of remission prediction models, pending validation in real clinical datasets.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that LLM-generated simulated patients can refine a reproducible, transparent, and ethically safe algorithm for selecting diabetes remission prediction models, with future validation required using real-world clinical data.
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.