ArticleBMC nephrology2026
Ultrasound radiomics-based machine learning models for differentiating diabetic kidney disease from non-diabetic kidney disease in type 2 diabetes.
Article in BMC nephrology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveNoninvasive differentiation of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) from non-diabetic kidney disease (NDKD) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remains challenging, as conventional clinical markers and ultrasound imaging lack sufficient accuracy and reliability. This limitation often leads to unnecessary renal biopsies or delayed diagnosis. To address this gap, this study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning model integrating renal ultrasound radiomic features and clinical predictors to distinguish DKD from NDKD in T2DM patients.
methodsPatients with T2DM who underwent renal biopsy were retrospectively enrolled from three centers. Based on biopsy findings, patients were classified as DKD or NDKD, with overlapping lesions assigned to DKD. Renal ultrasound images were collected for ROI delineation and radiomic feature extraction. Clinical predictors were selected using logistic regression, correlation analysis, and LASSO. SVM, KNN, RF, and XGBoost models were developed using radiomic features alone or combined with clinical variables. Performance was evaluated by AUC, accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score, and SHAP was used for model interpretation.
resultsUnivariate analysis identified serum creatinine, eGFR, albumin and LDL‑C as significant variables, and eGFR was selected as the final clinical predictor after LASSO and multivariable logistic regression. The radiomics‑only model performed well in the training cohort but showed lower performance in the validation cohorts. The integrated model combining radiomic features with eGFR achieved AUCs of 0.991, 0.895 and 0.721 in the training, internal validation and external validation cohorts, respectively, with corresponding F1‑scores of 0.939, 0.815 and 0.714. DeLong's test further showed that XGBoost performed better than several comparator algorithms in the training and internal validation cohorts, whereas no significant differences were observed among models in the external validation cohort.
conclusionThe XGBoost model integrating renal ultrasound radiomic features with eGFR showed favourable performance for differentiating DKD from NDKD in patients with T2DM. By using routinely available ultrasound images and a readily accessible clinical indicator, this model may serve as a non-invasive auxiliary tool for preliminary screening in primary-level hospitals or nephrology departments, providing supportive evidence for individualized assessment and renal biopsy decision-making.
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.