ArticleKidney & blood pressure research2026
Detection of Nondiabetic Kidney Disease in Patients with Diabetes Using Machine Learning and Electronic Medical Record Data.
Article in Kidney & blood pressure research, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe identification of nondiabetic kidney disease (NDKD) in diabetic patients is critically important. Unlike diabetic nephropathy, NDKD often requires additional therapeutic interventions beyond standard diabetes care. There is a need to develop computational methods using electronic medical record data to identify NDKD in diabetic patients for whom kidney biopsy is not an option.
methodsThe study included 1,136 diabetic patients who underwent kidney biopsy at a tertiary teaching hospital. We collected 103 parameters from electronic medical records, including demographic characteristics, physical examination results, laboratory tests, and the status of diabetic retinopathy. We developed seven models to detect NDKD, including k nearest neighbors, random forest, extreme gradient boosting (XGB), LASSO logistic regression, support vector machine, naïve Bayes, and multilayer perceptron (MLP), in the training set (n = 908) and compared their performances in the testing set (n = 228). The SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) approach was used to analyze the importance of features.
resultsBiopsy-confirmed NDKD was present in 53% of the 1,136 participants. In the testing set, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for NDKD detection using XGB, LASSO regression, and MLP reached 0.8, with performances that were stable regardless of whether variable normalization was performed. Among them, XGB revealed the highest AUC (0.833; 95% CI: 0.800-0.864) without feature normalization, which was statistically superior to the other models according to DeLong's tests. After feature normalization, SVM achieved the highest AUC of 0.841 (95% CI: 0.817-0.861) among all models. In addition to established predictive factors for NDKD (e.g., hematuria and absence of diabetic retinopathy), SHAP analysis identified several features, such as low IgG levels, that contributed significantly to the differentiation models.
conclusionDespite performance variations in different modeling techniques, machine learning models may have the potential to facilitate the detection of NDKD for patients with contraindications for kidney biopsy. Further efforts are warranted to improve accuracy and facilitate their translation into clinical practice.
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.