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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |