ArticleMedicine2026
Predicting insulin resistance in non-diabetics: Comparing obesity indicators using machine learning.
Article in Medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This cross-sectional study aimed to compare obesity indicators for predicting insulin resistance using machine learning. Data were obtained from NHANES 2015 to 2018, focusing on a nondiabetic adult population. Insulin resistance was defined as HOMA-IR ≥ 75th percentile of the training set. Key predictors were selected via bootstrap stability selection with elastic net. Logistic regression, random forest, and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) models were built using body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR). Performance was assessed by area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, calibration, and decision curve analysis. Race-stratified and nested regression analyses were performed. A total of 3562 subjects were included. BMI, WHtR, Glycated hemoglobin, and triglycerides were identified as key predictors. All models achieved AUC > 0.79; logistic regression (LR) performed best (BMI-based LR: AUC = 0.811; WHtR-based LR: AUC = 0.811). WHtR-based LR showed slightly better accuracy (0.746 vs 0.715) and specificity (0.744 vs 0.678). Obesity indicators had the highest feature importance, and race-stratified analyses confirmed general robustness across subgroups. WHtR and BMI are strong independent predictors of IR. LR models using these simple indices performed well in discrimination, calibration, and net benefit, offering cost-effective screening options, particularly where resources are scarce. Future work should prioritize external validation and race-specific thresholds.
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.