Predicting Diabetes in Canadian Adults Using Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rising diabetes rates have led to increased health-care costs and health complications. An estimated half of diabetes cases remain undiagnosed. Early and accurate diagnosis is crucial to mitigate disease progression and associated risks. This study addresses the challenge of predicting diabetes prevalence in Canadian adults by employing machine learning (ML) techniques to primary care data. We leveraged the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN), Canada’s premier multi-disease electronic medical record surveillance system, and developed and tuned seven ML classification models to predict the likelihood of diabetes. The models were tested and validated, focusing on clinical patient characteristics influential in predicting diabetes. We found XGBoost performed best out of all the models, with an AUC of 92%. The most important features contributing to model prediction were HbA1c, LDL, and hypertension medication. Our research aims to aid healthcare professionals in early diagnosis and to identify key characteristics for targeted interventions. This study contributes to an understanding of how ML can enhance public health planning and reduce healthcare system burdens.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".