Cited by 99Bariatric Surgery and OutcomesDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Treatment and Management

Predicting 10-Year Risk of End-Organ Complications of Type 2 Diabetes With and Without Metabolic Surgery: A Machine Learning Approach

Open access
Aminian, Ali, Zajichek, Alexander, Arterburn, David E., Wolski, Kathy E., Brethauer, Stacy A., Schauer, Philip R., Nissen, Steven E., Kattan, Michael W.·2020·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To construct and internally validate prediction models to estimate the risk of long-term end-organ complications and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes and obesity that can be used to inform treatment decisions for patients and practitioners who are considering metabolic surgery. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 2,287 patients with type 2 diabetes who underwent metabolic surgery between 1998 and 2017 in the Cleveland Clinic Health System were propensity-matched 1:5 to 11,435 nonsurgical patients with BMI ≥30 kg/m2 and type 2 diabetes who received usual care with follow-up through December 2018. Multivariable time-to-event regression and random forest machine learning models were built and internally validated using fivefold cross-validation to predict the 10-year risk for four outcomes of interest. The prediction models were programmed to construct user-friendly web-based and smartphone applications of Individualized Diabetes Complications (IDC) Risk Scores for clinical use. RESULTS: The prediction tools demonstrated the following discrimination ability based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (1 = perfect discrimination and 0.5 = chance) at 10 years in the surgical and nonsurgical groups, respectively: all-cause mortality (0.79 and 0.81), coronary artery events (0.66 and 0.67), heart failure (0.73 and 0.75), and nephropathy (0.73 and 0.76). When a patient’s data are entered into the IDC application, it estimates the individualized 10-year morbidity and mortality risks with and without undergoing metabolic surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The IDC Risk Scores can provide personalized evidence-based risk information for patients with type 2 diabetes and obesity about future cardiovascular outcomes and mortality with and without metabolic surgery based on their current status of obesity, diabetes, and related cardiometabolic conditions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/dc19-2057

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Aminian et al. (2020) found that cardiovascular events are among the most frequent complications in patients with type 2 diabetes and obesity.

    “They found that cardiovascular events are among the most frequent complications in patients with type 2 diabetes and obesity.”

    From Artificial intelligence based prediction models for individuals at risk of multiple diabetic complications: A systematic review of the literature (2022) · cites this paper as Aminian et al. (2020)

    The Introduction (page unavailable) identifies cardiovascular outcomes as important complications in patients with type 2 diabetes and obesity, and its baseline-characteristics table reports coronary artery disease and heart failure in roughly 10% of the study groups. The paper does not establish that cardiovascular events, as a group, are among the most frequent complications; that frequency ranking goes beyond what these passages show. (LLM, conf=0.80)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aminian, A., Zajichek, A., Arterburn, D. E., Wolski, K. E., Brethauer, S. A., Schauer, P. R., Nissen, S. E., & Kattan, M. W.
Affiliations
  • Cleveland Clinic (US)
  • Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute (US)
  • Pennington Biomedical Research Center (US)
Corresponding author
Aminian, Ali
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2020-02-06
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
852-859
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W3004712038
Cited by
99
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 7
FWCI
16.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Medtronic
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, metabolic surgery, obesity, end-organ complications, 10-year risk prediction, all-cause mortality, coronary artery disease, heart failure, diabetic nephropathy, risk prediction model, mobile health apps, cardiovascular outcomes
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Computer Simulation, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, Disease Progression, Diabetes Complications, Bariatric Surgery, Young Adult, Organs at Risk

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review