Diabetes & metabolism journal · 2022
Development of Various Diabetes Prediction Models Using Machine Learning Techniques.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shin Juyoung, Kim Jaewon, Lee Chanjung, Yoon Joon Young, Kim Seyeon, Song Seungjae, Kim Hun-Sung
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There are many models for predicting diabetes mellitus (DM), but their clinical implication remains vague. Therefore, we aimed to create various DM prediction models using easily accessible health screening test parameters.
METHODS: Two sets of variables were used to develop eight DM prediction models. One set comprised 62 easily accessible examination results of commonly used variables from a tertiary university hospital. The second set comprised 27 of the 62 variables included in the national routine health checkups. Gradient boosting and random forest algorithms were used to develop the models. Internal validation was performed using the stratified 10-fold cross-validation method.
RESULTS: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) for the 62-variable DM model making 12-month predictions for subjects without diabetes was the largest (0.928) among those of the eight DM prediction models. The ROC-AUC dropped by more than 0.04 when training with the simplified 27-variable set but still showed fairly good performance with ROC-AUCs between 0.842 and 0.880. The accuracy was up to 11.5% higher (from 0.807 to 0.714) when fasting glucose was included.
CONCLUSION: We created easily applicable diabetes prediction models that deliver good performance using parameters commonly assessed during tertiary university hospital and national routine health checkups. We plan to perform prospective external validation, hoping that the developed DM prediction models will be widely used in clinical practice.
METHODS: Two sets of variables were used to develop eight DM prediction models. One set comprised 62 easily accessible examination results of commonly used variables from a tertiary university hospital. The second set comprised 27 of the 62 variables included in the national routine health checkups. Gradient boosting and random forest algorithms were used to develop the models. Internal validation was performed using the stratified 10-fold cross-validation method.
RESULTS: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) for the 62-variable DM model making 12-month predictions for subjects without diabetes was the largest (0.928) among those of the eight DM prediction models. The ROC-AUC dropped by more than 0.04 when training with the simplified 27-variable set but still showed fairly good performance with ROC-AUCs between 0.842 and 0.880. The accuracy was up to 11.5% higher (from 0.807 to 0.714) when fasting glucose was included.
CONCLUSION: We created easily applicable diabetes prediction models that deliver good performance using parameters commonly assessed during tertiary university hospital and national routine health checkups. We plan to perform prospective external validation, hoping that the developed DM prediction models will be widely used in clinical practice.