A Noninvasive, Economical, and Instant-Result Method to Diagnose and Monitor Type 2 Diabetes Using Pulse Wave: Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: We should pay more attention to the long-term monitoring and early warning of type 2 diabetes and its complications. The traditional blood glucose tests are traumatic and cannot effectively monitor the development of diabetic complications. The development of mobile health is changing rapidly. Therefore, we are interested in developing a new noninvasive, economical, and instant-result method to accurately diagnose and monitor type 2 diabetes and its complications. Objective: We aimed to determine whether type 2 diabetes and its complications, including hypertension and hyperlipidemia, could be diagnosed and monitored by using pulse wave. Methods: We collected the pulse wave parameters from 50 healthy people, 139 diabetic patients without hypertension and hyperlipidemia, 133 diabetic patients with hypertension, 70 diabetic patients with hyperlipidemia, and 75 diabetic patients with hypertension and hyperlipidemia. The pulse wave parameters showing significant differences among these groups were identified. Various machine learning models such as linear discriminant analysis, support vector machines (SVMs), and random forests were applied to classify the control group, diabetic patients, and diabetic patients with complications. Results: There were significant differences in several pulse wave parameters among the 5 groups. The parameters height of tidal wave (h3), time distance between the start point of pulse wave and dominant wave (t1), and width of percussion wave in its one-third height position (W) increase and the height of dicrotic wave (h5) decreases when people develop diabetes. The parameters height of dominant wave (h1), h3, and height of dicrotic notch (h4) are found to be higher in diabetic patients with hypertension, whereas h5 is lower in diabetic patients with hyperlipidemia. For detecting diabetes, the method with the highest out-of-sample prediction accuracy is SVM with polynomial kernel. The algorithm can detect diabetes with 96.35% accuracy. However, all the algorithms have a low accuracy when predicting diabetic patients with hypertension and hyperlipidemia (below 70%). Conclusions: The results demonstrated that the noninvasive and convenient pulse-taking diagnosis described in this paper has the potential to become a low-cost and accurate method to monitor the development of diabetes. We are collecting more data to improve the accuracy for detecting hypertension and hyperlipidemia among diabetic patients. Mobile devices such as sport bands, smart watches, and other diagnostic tools are being developed based on the pulse wave method to improve the diagnosis and monitoring of diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".