Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Simple Linear Support Vector Machine Classifier Can Distinguish Impaired Glucose Tolerance Versus Type 2 Diabetes Using a Reduced Set of CGM-Based Glycemic Variability Indices.
Longato, Enrico; Acciaroli, Giada; Facchinetti, Andrea; Maran, Alberto; Sparacino, Giovanni.
Affiliation
  • Longato E; Department of Information Engineering, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
  • Acciaroli G; Department of Information Engineering, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
  • Facchinetti A; Department of Information Engineering, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
  • Maran A; Department of Medicine, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
  • Sparacino G; Department of Information Engineering, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
J Diabetes Sci Technol ; 14(2): 297-302, 2020 03.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30931604
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Many glycemic variability (GV) indices exist in the literature. In previous works, we demonstrated that a set of GV indices, extracted from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data, can distinguish between stages of diabetes progression. We showed that 25 indices driving a logistic regression classifier can differentiate between healthy and nonhealthy individuals; whereas 37 GV indices and four individual parameters, feeding a polynomial-kernel support vector machine (SVM), can further distinguish between impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). The latter approach has some limitations to interpretability (complex model, extensive index pool). In this article, we try to obtain the same performance with a simpler classifier and a parsimonious subset of indices.

METHODS:

We analyzed the data of 62 subjects with IGT or T2D. We selected 17 interpretable GV indices and four parameters (age, sex, BMI, waist circumference). We trained a SVM on the data of a baseline visit and tested it on the follow-up visit, comparing the results with the state-of-art methods.

RESULTS:

The linear SVM fed by a reduced subset of 17 GV indices and four basic parameters achieved 82.3% accuracy, only marginally worse than the reference 87.1% (41-features polynomial-kernel SVM). Cross-validation accuracies were comparable (69.6% vs 72.5%).

CONCLUSION:

The proposed SVM fed by 17 GV indices and four parameters can differentiate between IGT and T2D. Using a simpler model and a parsimonious set of indices caused only a slight accuracy deterioration, with significant advantages in terms of interpretability.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Blood Glucose / Health Status Indicators / Glucose Intolerance / Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 / Support Vector Machine Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Evaluation_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Year: 2020 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Blood Glucose / Health Status Indicators / Glucose Intolerance / Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 / Support Vector Machine Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Evaluation_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Year: 2020 Type: Article