↓ Skip to main content

Accurate Diabetes Risk Stratification Using Machine Learning: Role of Missing Value and Outliers

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Systems, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
3 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
182 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
239 Mendeley
Title
Accurate Diabetes Risk Stratification Using Machine Learning: Role of Missing Value and Outliers
Published in
Journal of Medical Systems, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10916-018-0940-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Md. Maniruzzaman, Md. Jahanur Rahman, Md. Al-MehediHasan, Harman S. Suri, Md. Menhazul Abedin, Ayman El-Baz, Jasjit S. Suri

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus is a group of metabolic diseases in which blood sugar levels are too high. About 8.8% of the world was diabetic in 2017. It is projected that this will reach nearly 10% by 2045. The major challenge is that when machine learning-based classifiers are applied to such data sets for risk stratification, leads to lower performance. Thus, our objective is to develop an optimized and robust machine learning (ML) system under the assumption that missing values or outliers if replaced by a median configuration will yield higher risk stratification accuracy. This ML-based risk stratification is designed, optimized and evaluated, where: (i) the features are extracted and optimized from the six feature selection techniques (random forest, logistic regression, mutual information, principal component analysis, analysis of variance, and Fisher discriminant ratio) and combined with ten different types of classifiers (linear discriminant analysis, quadratic discriminant analysis, naïve Bayes, Gaussian process classification, support vector machine, artificial neural network, Adaboost, logistic regression, decision tree, and random forest) under the hypothesis that both missing values and outliers when replaced by computed medians will improve the risk stratification accuracy. Pima Indian diabetic dataset (768 patients: 268 diabetic and 500 controls) was used. Our results demonstrate that on replacing the missing values and outliers by group median and median values, respectively and further using the combination of random forest feature selection and random forest classification technique yields an accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and area under the curve as: 92.26%, 95.96%, 79.72%, 91.14%, 91.20%, and 0.93, respectively. This is an improvement of 10% over previously developed techniques published in literature. The system was validated for its stability and reliability. RF-based model showed the best performance when outliers are replaced by median values.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 239 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 239 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 10%
Researcher 24 10%
Student > Bachelor 20 8%
Student > Master 17 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 39 16%
Unknown 103 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 40 17%
Engineering 23 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 5%
Neuroscience 3 1%
Other 30 13%
Unknown 116 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 May 2023.
All research outputs
#5,021,171
of 23,862,416 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Systems
#169
of 1,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,187
of 332,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Systems
#3
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,862,416 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,200 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,354 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.