Evidence Hub

Cluster Analysis in Diabetes Research: A Systematic Review Enhanced by a Cross-Sectional Study

B. Taurbekova, R. Sarsenov, M. Yaqoob, K. Atageldiyeva, Yulia Semenova, S. Fazli, Andrey Starodubov, Akmaral Angalieva et al.

Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2025

558 participants · 15 citations

Abstract

Background: Diabetes mellitus is a heterogeneous metabolic disorder that poses substantial challenges in the management of patients with diabetes. Emerging research underscores the potential of unsupervised cluster analysis as a promising methodological approach for unraveling the complex heterogeneity of diabetes mellitus. This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of unsupervised cluster analysis in identifying diabetes phenotypes, elucidating the risks of diabetes-related complications, and distinguishing treatment responses. Methods: We searched MEDLINE Complete, PubMed, and Web of Science and reviewed forty-one relevant studies. Additionally, we conducted a cross-sectional study using K-means cluster analysis of real-world clinical data from 558 patients with diabetes. Results: A key finding was the consistent reproducibility of the five clusters across diverse populations, encompassing various patient origins and ethnic backgrounds. MOD and MARD were the most prevalent clusters, while SAID was the least prevalent. Subgroup analysis stratified by ethnic group indicated a higher prevalence of SIDD among individuals of Asian descent than among other ethnic groups. These clusters shared similar phenotypic traits and risk profiles for complications, with some variations in their distribution and key clinical variables. Notably, the SIRD subtype was associated with a wide spectrum of kidney-related clinical presentations. Alternative clustering techniques may reveal…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 558 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free