Selected article for: "curve analysis and significant difference"

Author: Wu, Yang; Hu, Haofei; Cai, Jinlin; Chen, Runtian; Zuo, Xin; Cheng, Heng; Yan, Dewen
Title: Machine Learning for Predicting the 3-Year Risk of Incident Diabetes in Chinese Adults
  • Cord-id: g9pc71jt
  • Document date: 2021_6_29
  • ID: g9pc71jt
    Snippet: Purpose: We aimed to establish and validate a risk assessment system that combines demographic and clinical variables to predict the 3-year risk of incident diabetes in Chinese adults. Methods: A 3-year cohort study was performed on 15,928 Chinese adults without diabetes at baseline. All participants were randomly divided into a training set (n = 7,940) and a validation set (n = 7,988). XGBoost method is an effective machine learning technique used to select the most important variables from can
    Document: Purpose: We aimed to establish and validate a risk assessment system that combines demographic and clinical variables to predict the 3-year risk of incident diabetes in Chinese adults. Methods: A 3-year cohort study was performed on 15,928 Chinese adults without diabetes at baseline. All participants were randomly divided into a training set (n = 7,940) and a validation set (n = 7,988). XGBoost method is an effective machine learning technique used to select the most important variables from candidate variables. And we further established a stepwise model based on the predictors chosen by the XGBoost model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), decision curve and calibration analysis were used to assess discrimination, clinical use and calibration of the model, respectively. The external validation was performed on a cohort of 11,113 Japanese participants. Result: In the training and validation sets, 148 and 145 incident diabetes cases occurred. XGBoost methods selected the 10 most important variables from 15 candidate variables. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body mass index (BMI) and age were the top 3 important variables. And we further established a stepwise model and a prediction nomogram. The AUCs of the stepwise model were 0.933 and 0.910 in the training and validation sets, respectively. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed a perfect fit between the predicted diabetes risk and the observed diabetes risk (p = 0.068 for the training set, p = 0.165 for the validation set). Decision curve analysis presented the clinical use of the stepwise model and there was a wide range of alternative threshold probability spectrum. And there were almost no the interactions between these predictors (most P-values for interaction >0.05). Furthermore, the AUC for the external validation set was 0.830, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test for the external validation set showed no statistically significant difference between the predicted diabetes risk and observed diabetes risk (P = 0.824). Conclusion: We established and validated a risk assessment system for characterizing the 3-year risk of incident diabetes.

    Search related documents:
    Co phrase search for related documents
    • absolute value and accuracy sensitivity specificity: 1, 2, 3
    • absolute value and actual relationship: 1
    • absolute value and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
    • accuracy sensitivity and additive explanations: 1
    • accuracy sensitivity and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • accuracy sensitivity and longitudinal analysis: 1
    • accuracy sensitivity specificity and additive explanations: 1
    • accuracy sensitivity specificity and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
    • accuracy sensitivity specificity and longitudinal analysis: 1
    • accuracy speed and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3
    • actual relationship and logistic regression: 1
    • add benefit and logistic regression: 1, 2
    • additive explanations and logistic regression: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6