ArticleScientific reports2026
A copula based supervised filter for feature selection in machine learning driven diabetes risk prediction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing Two Categorical Gini Correlations with Applications to Classification Problems.Statistical papers (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- Decision tree with randomized grid search-based hyperparameter tuning and optimal feature scaling for diabetes diagnosis.BMC bioinformatics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Effective feature selection is critical for building robust and interpretable predictive models, particularly in medical applications where identifying risk factors in the most extreme patient strata is essential. Traditional methods often focus on average associations, potentially overlooking predictors whose importance is concentrated in the tails of the data distribution. In this study, we introduce a novel, computationally efficient supervised filter that leverages a Gumbel copula implied upper-tail concordance score ([Formula: see text], a monotone transformation of Kendall's τ) to rank features by their tendency to be simultaneously extreme with the positive class. We evaluated this method against four standard baselines (Mutual Information, mRMR, ReliefF, and L1/Elastic-Net) across four classifiers on two diabetes datasets: a large-scale public health survey (CDC, [Formula: see text]) and a classic clinical benchmark (PIMA, [Formula: see text]). Our analysis included comprehensive statistical tests, permutation importance, and robustness checks. On the CDC dataset, our method was the fastest selector and reduced the feature space by ≈52%. While this resulted in a minimal but statistically significant performance trade-off compared to using all 21 features, our filter significantly outperformed standard filters (Mutual Information, mRMR) and was statistically indistinguishable from the strong ReliefF baseline. On the PIMA dataset (8 predictors), our method's ranking produced the numerically highest ROC-AUC, despite paired DeLong tests showing no statistically significant differences versus strong baselines. PIMA thus serves as a ranking-only sanity check that our upper-tail criterion behaves sensibly in a low-dimensional clinical setting. Across both datasets, the Gumbel-[Formula: see text] selector consistently identified clinically coherent and impactful predictors. We conclude that feature selection via upper-tail dependence is an efficient and interpretable screening approach that can complement standard feature-selection baselines in public health and clinical risk prediction.
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.