Background Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a common endocrine metabolic disease, involving a carbohydrate intolerance of variable severity during pregnancy. The incidence of GDM-related complications and adverse pregnancy outcomes has declined, in part, due to early screening. Machine learning (ML) models are increasingly used to identify risk factors and enable the early prediction of GDM. Objective The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis and comparison of published prognostic models for predicting the risk of GDM and identify predictors applicable to the models. Methods Four reliable electronic databases were searched for studies that developed ML prediction models for GDM in the general population instead of among high-risk groups only. The novel Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was used to assess the risk of bias of the ML models. The Meta-DiSc software program (version 1.4) was used to perform the meta-analysis and determination of heterogeneity. To limit the influence of heterogeneity, we also performed sensitivity analyses, a meta-regression, and subgroup analysis. Results A total of 25 studies that included women older than 18 years without a history of vital disease were analyzed. The pooled area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for ML models predicting GDM was 0.8492; the pooled sensitivity was 0.69 (95% CI 0.68-0.69; P<.001; I2=99.6%) and the pooled specificity was 0.75 (95% CI 0.75-0.75; P<.001; I2=100%). As one of the most commonly employed ML methods, logistic regression achieved an overall pooled AUROC of 0.8151, while non–logistic regression models performed better, with an overall pooled AUROC of 0.8891. Additionally, maternal age, family history of diabetes, BMI, and fasting blood glucose were the four most commonly used features of models established by the various feature selection methods. Conclusions Compared to current screening strategies, ML methods are attractive for predicting GDM. To expand their use, the importance of quality assessments and unified diagnostic criteria should be further emphasized.
BACKGROUND Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a kind of common endocrine metabolic diseases, including carbohydrate intolerance of variable severity during pregnancy. The incidence rates of GDM related complications and adverse pregnancy outcomes will decline partly due to early screening. Nowadays, machine learning (ML) models have found an increasingly wide utilization, whether for risk factors selection or early prediction of GDM. OBJECTIVE Though many models for pregnancy women have been proposed and verified through experimental studies, few of them have been clinically recognized. Since seldom publication has evaluated the performance of ML prediction models for GDM, this meta-analysis was conducted and put forward some suggestions for model providers, users and policy makers basing on the findings. METHODS Four reliable electronic databases were searched for studies that developing ML prediction models for GDM in the general population, instead of the high-risk groups. The Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was used as a novel tool assessing the risk of bias of ML models. The software program Meta-Disc 1.4 was utilized to perform the Meta-analysis and determination of heterogeneity. To limit the influence of heterogeneity, results of sensitivity analysis, meta-regression and subgroups analysis were provided. RESULTS Twenty-five studies were analyzed which included women older than 18 years without a history of vital disease. The pooled area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the pooled sensitivity and specificity for ML to predict GDM was 0.8492, 0.69 (95%CI: 0.68–0.69, P < .001, I2 = 99.6%)and 0.75 (95%CI:0.75–0.75, P < .001, I2 = 100%) respectively. As one of the most employed ML methods, logistic regression (LR) achieved an overall pooled AUC at 0.8151 while non-LR models performed better with an overall polled AUC at 0.8891. Additionally, maternal age, family history of diabetes, BMI and fasting blood glucose were the four mostly used features of models established by various feature selection methods. CONCLUSIONS ML methods could be cost-effective screening methods for GDM. The importance of quality assessment and unified diagnostic criteria should be further emphasized.
Pharmaceutical wastewater is a kind of high-hazardous waste. To realize non-waste production, experiment and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation were performed to reveal the hydraulic mechanism of mixing modes. Three digesters, numbered 0# (no-port), 1# (one-port), and 4# (four-port), were conducted by dextran pharmaceutical wastewater. Digester 0# is the control group without mixing. Mixing mode of bottom inlet and high-position outlet is employed to 1# and 4#, the outlets of 1# and 4# are centralized outlet with only one port and distributed outlets with four ports, respectively. Experiment result shows the daily biogas production of 1# and 4# are 45% and 58% higher than 0#, and the pollutants removal rate increased 20% and 24%, respectively. CFD simulation shows the second phase (dextran wastewater) of 4# failing to form a complete hydraulic path like the first phase (water), which explain the mixing modes can greatly improve the biogas yield, but the fourport mode has a weaker advantage than the one-port.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.