ArticleJAMIA open2026
Inferring high-fat dietary patterns from electronic health record data using machine learning.
Article in JAMIA open, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: Electronic health records (EHRs) rarely capture dietary detail, limiting diet-disease research. We aimed to develop machine learning (ML) computable phenotypes to identify high-fat diet (HFD) using variables typically available in EHRs. Materials and Methods: We used National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999-2020 data, where 24-h dietary recall served as ground truth. Dietary fat intake was summarized into a score (0-30) based on percent energy from fat, carbohydrate, and protein; lower scores indicated HFD. We defined HFD at cutoffs of 10, 15, and 20, and trained ML models (Extreme Gradient Boosting, logistic regression, random forest) using EHR-compatible variables (demographics, comorbidities, labs, anthropometrics). Model interpretability was assessed using Shapley Additive Explanations. To evaluate clinical relevance, we compared cancer associations using ML-predicted vs true diet labels. Results: Machine learning models classified HFD with good performance, strongest at broader definitions. Random forest achieved an F1-score of 0.79 (recall 0.74, precision 0.84) at cutoff 20. Key predictors included race/ethnicity, triglycerides, obesity metrics (body mass index and derived indices), and metabolic panel results. Discussion: These findings indicate that dietary patterns, though seldom recorded in EHRs, can be inferred from routinely available variables. The ability of ML-derived phenotypes to reproduce known diet-disease relationships underscore their epidemiologic validity. Top predictors also align with established biological pathways linking obesity, lipid metabolism, and cancer risk, supporting plausibility. Conclusion: A high-fat dietary pattern can be inferred from EHR-compatible variables using ML-based phenotyping. This approach offers a scalable tool to integrate diet into EHR-based research and precision medicine.
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.