Artificial intelligence with temporal features outperforms machine learning in predicting diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetes mellitus type 2 is increasingly being called a modern preventable pandemic, as even with excellent available treatments, the rate of complications of diabetes is rapidly increasing. Predicting diabetes and identifying it in its early stages could make it easier to prevent, allowing enough time to implement therapies before it gets out of control. Leveraging longitudinal electronic medical record (EMR) data with deep learning has great potential for diabetes prediction. This paper examines the predictive competency of deep learning models in contrast to state-of-the-art machine learning models to incorporate the time dimension of risk. The proposed research investigates a variety of deep learning models and features for predicting diabetes. Model performance was appraised and compared in relation to predominant features, risk factors, training data density and visit history. The framework was implemented on the longitudinal EMR records of over 19K patients extracted from the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN). Empirical findings demonstrate that deep learning models consistently outperform other state-of-the-art competitors with prediction accuracy of above 91%, without overfitting. Fasting blood sugar, hemoglobin A1c and body mass index are the key predictors of future onset of diabetes. Overweight, middle aged patients and patients with hypertension are more vulnerable to developing diabetes, consistent with what is already known. Model performance improves as training data density or the visit history of a patient increases. This study confirms the ability of the LSTM deep learning model to incorporate the time dimension of risk in its predictive capabilities.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".