Cargando…

Comparison of Different Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Diabetic Kidney Disease

BACKGROUND: Diabetic kidney disease (DKD), one of the complications of diabetes in patients, leads to progressive loss of kidney function. Timely intervention is known to improve outcomes. Therefore, screening patients to identify high-risk populations is important. Machine learning classification t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: David, Satish Kumar, Rafiullah, Mohamed, Siddiqui, Khalid
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8993553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35399848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/7378307
_version_ 1784683921009541120
author David, Satish Kumar
Rafiullah, Mohamed
Siddiqui, Khalid
author_facet David, Satish Kumar
Rafiullah, Mohamed
Siddiqui, Khalid
author_sort David, Satish Kumar
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Diabetic kidney disease (DKD), one of the complications of diabetes in patients, leads to progressive loss of kidney function. Timely intervention is known to improve outcomes. Therefore, screening patients to identify high-risk populations is important. Machine learning classification techniques can be applied to patient datasets to identify high-risk patients by building a predictive model. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify a suitable classification technique for predicting DKD by applying different classification techniques to a DKD dataset and comparing their performance using WEKA machine learning software. METHODS: The performance of nine different classification techniques was analyzed on a DKD dataset with 410 instances and 18 attributes. Data preprocessing was carried out using the PartitionMembershipFilter. A 10-fold cross validation was performed on the dataset. The performance was assessed on the basis of the execution time, accuracy, correctly and incorrectly classified instances, kappa statistics (K), mean absolute error, root mean squared error, and true values of the confusion matrix. RESULTS: With an accuracy of 93.6585% and a higher K value (0.8731), IBK and random tree classification techniques were found to be the best performing techniques. Moreover, they also exhibited the lowest root mean squared error rate (0.2496). There were 15 false-positive instances and 11 false-negative instances with these prediction models. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified IBK and random tree classification techniques as the best performing classifiers and accurate prediction methods for DKD.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8993553
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89935532022-04-09 Comparison of Different Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Diabetic Kidney Disease David, Satish Kumar Rafiullah, Mohamed Siddiqui, Khalid J Healthc Eng Research Article BACKGROUND: Diabetic kidney disease (DKD), one of the complications of diabetes in patients, leads to progressive loss of kidney function. Timely intervention is known to improve outcomes. Therefore, screening patients to identify high-risk populations is important. Machine learning classification techniques can be applied to patient datasets to identify high-risk patients by building a predictive model. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify a suitable classification technique for predicting DKD by applying different classification techniques to a DKD dataset and comparing their performance using WEKA machine learning software. METHODS: The performance of nine different classification techniques was analyzed on a DKD dataset with 410 instances and 18 attributes. Data preprocessing was carried out using the PartitionMembershipFilter. A 10-fold cross validation was performed on the dataset. The performance was assessed on the basis of the execution time, accuracy, correctly and incorrectly classified instances, kappa statistics (K), mean absolute error, root mean squared error, and true values of the confusion matrix. RESULTS: With an accuracy of 93.6585% and a higher K value (0.8731), IBK and random tree classification techniques were found to be the best performing techniques. Moreover, they also exhibited the lowest root mean squared error rate (0.2496). There were 15 false-positive instances and 11 false-negative instances with these prediction models. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified IBK and random tree classification techniques as the best performing classifiers and accurate prediction methods for DKD. Hindawi 2022-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8993553/ /pubmed/35399848 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/7378307 Text en Copyright © 2022 Satish Kumar David et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
David, Satish Kumar
Rafiullah, Mohamed
Siddiqui, Khalid
Comparison of Different Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Diabetic Kidney Disease
title Comparison of Different Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Diabetic Kidney Disease
title_full Comparison of Different Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Diabetic Kidney Disease
title_fullStr Comparison of Different Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Diabetic Kidney Disease
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Different Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Diabetic Kidney Disease
title_short Comparison of Different Machine Learning Techniques to Predict Diabetic Kidney Disease
title_sort comparison of different machine learning techniques to predict diabetic kidney disease
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8993553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35399848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/7378307
work_keys_str_mv AT davidsatishkumar comparisonofdifferentmachinelearningtechniquestopredictdiabetickidneydisease
AT rafiullahmohamed comparisonofdifferentmachinelearningtechniquestopredictdiabetickidneydisease
AT siddiquikhalid comparisonofdifferentmachinelearningtechniquestopredictdiabetickidneydisease