Articles Tập 67 Số CĐ14-HNKH Hội Hóa sinh Y học Việt Nam 19/09/2026

COMPARISON OF THE PERFORMANCE OF TWO ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MODELS USING THE DECISION TREE ALGORITHM FOR PREDICTING HBA1C ≥ 6.5% BASED ON BIOCHEMICAL TEST RESULTS AT BAC KAN GENERAL HOSPITAL IN 2026.

Nong Van Diep, Hoang Xuan Son, Trieu Thi Bien, Hoang Thi Thuan, Nguyen Duc Quan
DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v67iCD14.6477
0 Views
0 Downloads
Abstract

Objective: Comparison of the performance of two artificial intelligence models using the Decision Tree algorithm for predicting HbA1c ≥ 6.5% based on biochemical test results at Bac Kan General Hospital in 2026.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at Bac Kan General Hospital in 2026, involving 880 patients who underwent HbA1c and biochemical testing. Two Decision Tree models were developed using SPSS software based on the CART method, with a 70/30 training-to-testing data split. Model A utilized the variables of age, glucose, total cholesterol, triglycerides, AST, and ALT; Model B utilized age, total cholesterol, triglycerides, AST, and ALT (excluding glucose). The performance of both models was evaluated based on accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and risk estimate.

Results: Among the 880 patients studied, the group with HbA1c ≥ 6.5% exhibited statistically significantly higher glucose and triglyceride levels compared to the group with HbA1c < 6.5% (p < 0.05). Model A demonstrated superior performance to Model B on the test set, achieving an accuracy of 79.8% versus 57.5%; sensitivities of 63.0% and 12.7%, respectively; specificities of 89.7% and 90.6%; and error estimates of 0.202 and 0.425. In Model A, glucose was the most important variable and served as the initial splitting node of the decision tree; when glucose was removed, triglycerides became the model's most important variable in Model B.

Conclusions: The Decision Tree algorithm can assist in predicting HbA1c levels ≥ 6.5% based on biochemical test results. Incorporating the glucose variable significantly improves the model's predictive performance, underscoring the crucial role of glucose in developing artificial intelligence models to screen for patients at risk of elevated HbA1c.

References
[1]
1. IDF Diabetes Atlas. 11th ed. Brussels: International Diabetes Federation; 2025. Google Scholar
[2]
2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024. Diabetes care. 2024;47(Suppl 1). doi:10.2337/dc24-S002. Google Scholar
[3]
3. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nature Medicine. 2019;25(1):44-56. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7. Google Scholar
[4]
4. Kavakiotis I, Tsave O, Salifoglou A, et al. Machine Learning and Data Mining Methods in Diabetes Research. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2017;15:104-116. doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2016.12.005. Google Scholar
[5]
5. Tuppad A, Patil SD. Machine learning for diabetes clinical decision support: a review. Adv Comput Intell. 2022;2(2):22. doi:10.1007/s43674-022-00034-y. Google Scholar
[6]
6. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 2. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026. Diabetes Care. 2026;49(Suppl 1):S27-S46. Google Scholar
[7]
7. Ginsberg HN, Zhang YL, Hernandez-Ono A. Regulation of plasma triglycerides in insulin resistance and diabetes. Arch Med Res. 2005;36(3):232-240. doi:10.1016/j.arcmed.2005.01.005. PMID: 15925013. Google Scholar
[8]
8. Mohsen F, Al-Absi HRH, Yousri NA, et al. A scoping review of artificial intelligence-based methods for diabetes risk prediction. NPJ Digit Med. 2023;6(1):197. doi:10.1038/s41746-023-00933-5. PMID: 37880301. Google Scholar
[9]
9. Lugner M, Rawshani A, Helleryd E, Eliasson B. Identifying top ten predictors of type 2 diabetes through machine learning analysis of UK Biobank data. Sci Rep. 2024. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-52023-5. Google Scholar
[10]
10. Xu Q, Xie W, Liao B, et al. Interpretability of Clinical Decision Support Systems Based on Artificial Intelligence from Technological and Medical Perspective: A Systematic Review. Comput Math Methods Med. 2023;2023:9919269. doi:10.1155/2023/9919269. Google Scholar