Machine learning algorithms mimicking specialists decision making on initial treatment for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Japan diabetes data management study (JDDM76).

IF 4.3 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Jenny Elizabeth Price, Kazuya Fujihara, Satoru Kodama, Katsuya Yamazaki, Hiroshi Maegawa, Tatsuya Yamazaki, Hirohito Sone
{"title":"Machine learning algorithms mimicking specialists decision making on initial treatment for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Japan diabetes data management study (JDDM76).","authors":"Jenny Elizabeth Price, Kazuya Fujihara, Satoru Kodama, Katsuya Yamazaki, Hiroshi Maegawa, Tatsuya Yamazaki, Hirohito Sone","doi":"10.1016/j.dsx.2024.103168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate whether typical machine learning models that mimic specialists' care can successfully reproduce information, not only on whether to prescribe medications but also which hypoglycemic agents to prescribe as initial treatment for type 2 diabetes.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>A medical records database containing prescriptions for medications for 16,005 patients who visited a diabetologist's office for the first time was utilized to train five typical machine learning models as well-as a model used for logistic analysis. Prescribed were no medications (diet and exercise therapy), insulin, biguanides (BG), sulfonylureas (SU), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4I), alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (α-GI) or glinides. Models were compared based on the F1 score and ROC/AUC scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>XGBoost, which splits decision-making into three sections, was the top performing model (42 % accuracy) among five models and conventional logistic regression (35 % accuracy). The second highest scoring model was Support Vector Machines, which had an accuracy of 40 %. When using XGBoost to compare decisions on no medication needed vs. needing medication the AUC was 0.96. Insulin vs. oral medications had an AUC of 0.78. With all remaining oral medications removed, the AUC was 0.76.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Among the five models investigated, XGBoost outperformed the other machine learning models examined as well as the traditional logistic model, suggesting that its accuracy had the potential to assist non-specialists in decision-making regarding treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":48252,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome-Clinical Research & Reviews","volume":"18 11-12","pages":"103168"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome-Clinical Research & Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsx.2024.103168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate whether typical machine learning models that mimic specialists' care can successfully reproduce information, not only on whether to prescribe medications but also which hypoglycemic agents to prescribe as initial treatment for type 2 diabetes.

Research design and methods: A medical records database containing prescriptions for medications for 16,005 patients who visited a diabetologist's office for the first time was utilized to train five typical machine learning models as well-as a model used for logistic analysis. Prescribed were no medications (diet and exercise therapy), insulin, biguanides (BG), sulfonylureas (SU), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4I), alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (α-GI) or glinides. Models were compared based on the F1 score and ROC/AUC scores.

Results: XGBoost, which splits decision-making into three sections, was the top performing model (42 % accuracy) among five models and conventional logistic regression (35 % accuracy). The second highest scoring model was Support Vector Machines, which had an accuracy of 40 %. When using XGBoost to compare decisions on no medication needed vs. needing medication the AUC was 0.96. Insulin vs. oral medications had an AUC of 0.78. With all remaining oral medications removed, the AUC was 0.76.

Conclusions: Among the five models investigated, XGBoost outperformed the other machine learning models examined as well as the traditional logistic model, suggesting that its accuracy had the potential to assist non-specialists in decision-making regarding treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes in the future.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
22.90
自引率
2.00%
发文量
248
审稿时长
51 days
期刊介绍: Diabetes and Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research and Reviews is the official journal of DiabetesIndia. It aims to provide a global platform for healthcare professionals, diabetes educators, and other stakeholders to submit their research on diabetes care. Types of Publications: Diabetes and Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research and Reviews publishes peer-reviewed original articles, reviews, short communications, case reports, letters to the Editor, and expert comments. Reviews and mini-reviews are particularly welcomed for areas within endocrinology undergoing rapid changes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信