MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004527153 · doi:10.3389/fgene.2019.01076

A Hybrid Approach for Modeling Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Progression

2020· article· en· W3004527153 on OpenAlexafffund
Sajida Perveen, Muhammad Shahbaz, Muhammad Sajjad Ansari, Karim Keshavjee, Aziz Guergachi

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Genetics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of TorontoToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHidden Markov modelComputer scienceType 2 Diabetes MellitusArtificial intelligenceImputation (statistics)Diabetes mellitusMachine learningMedicineMissing data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic, progressive metabolic disorder characterized by hyperglycemia resulting from abnormalities in insulin secretion, insulin action, or both. It is associated with an increased risk of developing vascular complication of micro as well as macro nature. Because of its inconspicuous and heterogeneous character, the management of T2DM is very complex. Modeling physiological processes over time demonstrating the patient's evolving health condition is imperative to comprehending the patient's current status of health, projecting its likely dynamics and assessing the requisite care and treatment measures in future. Hidden Markov Model (HMM) is an effective approach for such prognostic modeling. However, the nature of the clinical setting, together with the format of the Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) data, in particular the sparse and irregularly sampled clinical data which is well understood to present significant challenges, has confounded standard HMM. In the present study, we proposed an approximation technique based on Newton's Divided Difference Method (NDDM) as a component with HMM to determine the risk of developing diabetes in an individual over different time horizons using irregular and sparsely sampled EMRs data. The proposed method is capable of exploiting available sequences of clinical measurements obtained from a longitudinal sample of patients for effective imputation and improved prediction performance. Furthermore, results demonstrated that the discrimination capability of our proposed method, in prognosticating diabetes risk, is superior to the standard HMM.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.154
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in GeneticsSame topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207