MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multi-Disease Risk Prediction: Leveraging Machine Learning for Heart Disease and Diabetes Prediction

2025· article· W7131129494 on OpenAlexaff
Rohit Kanauzia, Mridula, Kamal Kumar Gola, Renu Bahuguna, Mansi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsCanadiana.org
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeart diseaseDiabetes mellitusLogistic regressionDiseaseSupport vector machineEmpirical research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart disease is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, affecting primarily middle aged and older adults, and men are more likely to be affected than women. The International Diabetes Federation also states that there are 382 million people with diabetes worldwide. That number is also expected to rise to 592 million by the year of 2035. In this research study we will present a machine learning model that predicts heart disease and diabetes using data from Kaggle, Data World and the UCI repository. We were operating under the empirical goal of developing a model that could help us when attempting to predict heart disease and diabetes, so that fewer human beings die from each respectively. Our aim contrived the development of a model that is expected to gain a higher percentage of accuracy by combining the results of several machine learning techniques. The machine learning techniques used were KNN, logistic regression, random forest, SVM and finally gradient- boosting. The ultimate conception of our research study was to determine the best model to use when predicting heart disease and diabetes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207