MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401835217 · doi:10.3233/shti240519

Exploring Prediabetes Pathways Using Explainable AI on Data from Electronic Medical Records

2024· article· en· W4401835217 on OpenAlexaffabout
Davide Console, Marta Lenatti, Davide Simeone, Karim Keshavjee, Aziz Guergachi, Maurizio Mongelli, Alessia Paglialonga

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrediabetesGlycated hemoglobinCounterfactual thinkingMedicineArtificial intelligenceMedical recordComputer scienceType 2 diabetesMachine learningDiabetes mellitusPsychologyInternal medicineEndocrinologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study leverages data from a Canadian database of primary care Electronic Medical Records to develop machine learning models predicting type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D), prediabetes, or normoglycemia. These models are used as a basis for extracting counterfactual explanations and derive personalized changes in biomarkers to prevent T2D onset, particularly in the still reversible prediabetic state. The models achieve satisfactory performance. Furthermore, feature importance analysis underscores the significance of fasting blood sugar and glycated hemoglobin, while counterfactuals explanations emphasize the centrality of keeping body mass index and cholesterol indicators within or close to the clinically desirable ranges. This research highlights the potential of machine learning and counterfactual explanations in guiding preventive interventions that may help slow down the progression from prediabetes to T2D on an individual basis, eventually fostering a recovery from prediabetes to a normoglycemic state.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.649

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in health technology and informaticsSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207