ArticleInternational journal of medical sciences2026
Machine Learning with Social Determinants of Health for Cross-Sectional Diabetes Classification: Development and Temporal Validation.
Article in International journal of medical sciences, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Our study aimed to determine whether incorporating social determinants of health (SDOH) improves cross-sectional classification of prevalent diagnosed diabetes and to quantify the extent to which model performance is attributable to variables that may occur downstream of diabetes diagnosis. Methods: We analyzed data from the 2023 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) as the development cohort and the 2024 BRFSS as an independent temporal validation cohort. Analyses were restricted to adults aged 35 years or older residing in states that administered the SDOH module. The outcome was self-reported diagnosed diabetes. Before model development, 30% of the 2023 sample was reserved as a test set. Imputation, encoding, feature processing, and hyperparameter tuning were performed within nested cross-validation. Histogram-based gradient boosting and penalized logistic regression were evaluated across six pre-specified nested predictor specifications. Final models were applied unchanged to the 2024 cohort without refitting, re-tuning, or threshold recalibration. Performance estimates incorporated BRFSS survey weights. Results: The development cohort comprised 179,752 adults (weighted prevalence 16.97%) and the validation cohort 161,092 (18.07%). Discrimination ranged from 0.75 to 0.81 across algorithms, with gradient boosting and penalized logistic regression indistinguishable (0.811 versus 0.808). The full model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.811 (95% CI 0.801 - 0.822) and transported to the validation cohort with a calibration slope of 1.040. Adding nine SDOH items changed discrimination by 0.006 (95% CI 0.004 - 0.008), with maximum net benefit gain under 0.003; discrimination rose from 0.743 to 0.811 only when healthcare utilization and comorbidity measures were added. Several SDOH nonetheless showed robust adjusted associations, including food insecurity (OR 1.27 - 1.39) and supplemental nutrition assistance program receipt (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.11 - 1.61). At a fixed threshold, sensitivity ranged from 0.62 to 0.89 across age groups. Conclusions: SDOH were independently associated with prevalent diagnosed diabetes but provided little incremental value beyond demographic, behavioral, and healthcare access measures, a finding that was consistent across consecutive survey cycles. Most of the observed discrimination was attributable to healthcare utilization and comorbidity variables that may plausibly reflect consequences of an established diagnosis rather than characteristics preceding disease recognition.
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.