Predicting the risks of stroke, cardiovascular disease, and peripheral vascular disease among people with type 2 diabetes with artificial intelligence models: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Narra J Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-19 DOI:10.52225/narra.v5i1.2116
Aqsha Nur, Sydney Tjandra, Defin A Yumnanisha, Arnold Keane, Adang Bachtiar
{"title":"Predicting the risks of stroke, cardiovascular disease, and peripheral vascular disease among people with type 2 diabetes with artificial intelligence models: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Aqsha Nur, Sydney Tjandra, Defin A Yumnanisha, Arnold Keane, Adang Bachtiar","doi":"10.52225/narra.v5i1.2116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Macrovascular complications, including stroke, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD), significantly contribute to morbidity and mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) models in predicting these complications, emphasizing applicability in diverse healthcare settings. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search of six databases was conducted, yielding 46 eligible studies with 184 AI models. Predictive performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Subgroup analyses examined model performance by outcome type, predictor data (lab-only, non-lab, mixed), and algorithm type. Heterogeneity was evaluated using <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> statistics, and sensitivity analyses addressed outliers and study biases. The pooled AUROC for all AI models was 0.753 (95%CI: 0.740-0.766; <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 99-99%)· Models predicting PVD achieved the highest AUROC (0.794), followed by cerebrovascular diseases (0.770) and CVD (0.741). Gradient-boosting algorithms outperformed others (AUROC: 0.789). Models with lab-only predictors had superior performance (AUROC: 0.837) compared to mixed (0.759) and non-lab predictors (0.714). External validations reported reduced AUROC (0.725), underscoring limitations in generalizability. AI models show moderate predictive accuracy for T2DM macrovascular complications, with laboratory-based predictors being key to performance. However, the limited external validation and reliance on high-resource data restrict implementation in low-resource settings. Future efforts should focus on non-lab predictors, external validation, and context-appropriate AI solutions to enhance global applicability.</p>","PeriodicalId":517416,"journal":{"name":"Narra J","volume":"5 1","pages":"e2116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12059823/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Narra J","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v5i1.2116","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Macrovascular complications, including stroke, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD), significantly contribute to morbidity and mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) models in predicting these complications, emphasizing applicability in diverse healthcare settings. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search of six databases was conducted, yielding 46 eligible studies with 184 AI models. Predictive performance was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Subgroup analyses examined model performance by outcome type, predictor data (lab-only, non-lab, mixed), and algorithm type. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I 2 statistics, and sensitivity analyses addressed outliers and study biases. The pooled AUROC for all AI models was 0.753 (95%CI: 0.740-0.766; I 2 = 99-99%)· Models predicting PVD achieved the highest AUROC (0.794), followed by cerebrovascular diseases (0.770) and CVD (0.741). Gradient-boosting algorithms outperformed others (AUROC: 0.789). Models with lab-only predictors had superior performance (AUROC: 0.837) compared to mixed (0.759) and non-lab predictors (0.714). External validations reported reduced AUROC (0.725), underscoring limitations in generalizability. AI models show moderate predictive accuracy for T2DM macrovascular complications, with laboratory-based predictors being key to performance. However, the limited external validation and reliance on high-resource data restrict implementation in low-resource settings. Future efforts should focus on non-lab predictors, external validation, and context-appropriate AI solutions to enhance global applicability.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

用人工智能模型预测2型糖尿病患者中风、心血管疾病和外周血管疾病的风险:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
大血管并发症,包括中风、心血管疾病(CVD)和周围血管疾病(PVD),是2型糖尿病(T2DM)患者发病率和死亡率的重要因素。本研究的目的是评估人工智能(AI)模型在预测这些并发症方面的表现,强调在不同医疗保健环境中的适用性。按照PRISMA的指导方针,对6个数据库进行了系统搜索,得到了46项符合条件的研究,其中包含184个人工智能模型。使用受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUROC)评估预测性能。亚组分析按结果类型、预测数据(仅实验室、非实验室、混合)和算法类型检查模型性能。使用i2统计评估异质性,并进行敏感性分析以解决异常值和研究偏差。所有AI模型的合并AUROC为0.753 (95%CI: 0.740-0.766;预测PVD的模型AUROC最高(0.794),其次是脑血管疾病(0.770)和CVD(0.741)。梯度增强算法优于其他算法(AUROC: 0.789)。与混合预测因子(0.759)和非实验室预测因子(0.714)相比,仅使用实验室预测因子的模型具有更好的性能(AUROC: 0.837)。外部验证报告AUROC降低(0.725),强调了推广的局限性。人工智能模型对T2DM大血管并发症的预测准确性中等,基于实验室的预测指标是预测效果的关键。然而,有限的外部验证和对高资源数据的依赖限制了在低资源设置中的实现。未来的努力应该集中在非实验室预测、外部验证和适合上下文的人工智能解决方案上,以增强全球适用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信