Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies [ICICT 2021]

IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP21F70-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-8501-9

Performance Analysis of Chronic Kidney Disease

through Machine Learning Approaches
Minhaz Uddin Emon Al Mahmud Imran Rakibul Islam
Daffodil International University Daffodil International University Daffodil International University
Dhaka, Bangladesh Dhaka, Bangladesh Dhaka, Bangladesh
minhazkhondokar21@gmail.com md.almahmudimran@gmail.com rakibulhassan282@gmail.com
2021 6th International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies (ICICT) | 978-1-7281-8501-9/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ICICT50816.2021.9358491

Maria Sultana Keya Raihana Zannat Ohidujjaman

Daffodil International University Daffodil International University Daffodil International University
Dhaka, Bangladesh Dhaka, Bangladesh Dhaka, Bangladesh
maria.sultana.keya@gmail.com zannat.swe@diu.edu.bd jaman.cse@diu.edu.bd

Abstract—Data mining and machine learning play a vital
role in health care and also medical information and detection,
Now a day machine learning techniques use awareness of
some major health risks such as diabetic prediction, brain
tumor detection, covid 19 detections, and many more. The
kidney is the most important organ of our body and if it has
any problem then the impact is more dangerous to our body.
Chronic kidney disease (CKD), otherwise referred to as renal
disease. CKD requires disorders that damage and reduce the
capacity of our kidneys to keep us healthy. So, it is required
to be concerned about kidney disease to our very primary
stage. We take a few attributes to measure our analysis about
chronic kidney disease and this attribute is one of the major
occurrences of chronic kidney disease. Therefore 8 machine
learning classifier are used to measure analysis using weka tools
namely: Logistic Regression(LG), Naive Bayes(NB), Multilayer
Perceptron(MLP), Stochastic Gradient Descent(SGD), Adaptive
Boosting(Adaboost), Bagging, Decision Tree(DT), Random
Forest(RF) classifier are used. We feature extraction of all
attributes using principal component analysis(PCA). We gain
the highest accuracy from the Random Forest(RF) and it is
99% and ROC(receiver operating characteristic) curve value is
also highest from other algorithms.
Keywords—Chronic Kidney Disease, Machine Learning, Pre-
diction, PCA, Co-relation Metrics, Random Forest.
I. INTRODUCTION
Nowadays machine learning is an important field for re-
search. In different areas, different statistical and machine
learning algorithms are implemented. Such as marketing,
health, and medical problems, weather forecasting, the study
of socioeconomic behavior, etc we can use machine learning
in those fields. In the medical field, many diseases can be
detected by machine or predicted by machine by the appli-
cation of machine learning algorithms. Chronic diseases pose
an important threat to the global health agenda of the 21st
century. The rising prevalence of chronic diseases such as
chronic kidney disease has serious consequences for health and
economic output in developing countries. The rapid increase
in common risk factors, especially among the poor, such
as diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, would result in even
greater and deeper burdens that developing nations are not
prepared to cope with. There has been a lack of exposure
to chronic diseases, chronic kidney disease in particular,
primarily due to the focus of the global health community on
infectious diseases, and lack of consciousness. There is a vital
need to concentrate on it and the adoption of more inclusive,
cost-effective, and preventive chronic disease strategies by
developed countries. There are many hospitals which store
the data of chronic kidney disease patients in their database.
Through analyzing these data, various patterns can be found
that will be helpful for decision-making. Using data mining
techniques on these data, it is possible to discover many
kinds of knowledge and use this knowledge to predict the
disease. There is a massive amount of people who are affected
by chronic kidney disease. In Bangladesh maximum are not
concerned about the disease. As a result, the affected people by
the disease are increasing day by day. If people could detect or
predict if they are affected or going to be affected then it could
be controlled. People could take the necessary steps to not be
affected. For predicting the disease, predictive can be used.
There are several methods that can be used like, classification,
regression, categorization. Among those, many people think
classification is the best. After accomplishing the research,
it will help to predict Chronic Kidney disease. People will
be aware of the disease and their health condition. The main
objectives of the research are to predict the disease using a
machine learning algorithm, warning whether a person at risk
of the disease or not, and comparing the outcomes of various
machine learning algorithms to determine which algorithm
provides the best performance. The paper residue is structured
as follows: the related works are described in Section II, and
the entire methodology is shown in Section III. The result
analysis are discussed in Section IV. Finally, conclusion are
represented in Section V.
II. RELATED WORKS
Amirgaliyev et. al. expected the patient’s outcomes from
the chronic kidney disease dataset. Medical history, physical

978-1-7281-8501-9/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE 713

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO. Downloaded on May 25,2021 at 13:02:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies [ICICT 2021]
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP21F70-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-8501-9
exams, and laboratory samples were the basis of the gathered
dataset. They developed models for this dataset using a support
vector machine algorithm for linear kernel SVM classifiers
that were tested to find the best scores for sensitivity, speci-
ficity, and accuracy metrics. They also shown that the highest
precision of 93.1% [4]. Behind Charleonnan et. al. using
clinical evidence, projected chronic kidney disease. Along
with KNN, SVM, LR, and DT classifiers for predicted CKD,
four machine learning techniques were explored. The overall
precision was five times that of the four classifiers. It can be
seen from the experimental outcomes that the SVM classifier
has the best accuracy than the others with 98.3% though
Logistic, Tree of Decision and KNN can achieve average
correctness of 96.55%, 94.8%, and 98.1% respectively [5].
Sinha et. al. Chronic Kidney Disease was predicted using
the Support Vector (SVM) and K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN)
classifiers. The experimental results showed that the efficiency
of the KNN classifier is higher than that of the SVM. Help
vector machine (SVM) accuracy was 73.75% and K-Nearest
Neighbor (KNN) accuracy was 73.75% was 78.75% [6].
Sharma et. al. evaluated different classification methods for
diagnosis of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD). The dataset
used for this analysis consisted of 400 instances and 24
attributes. The authors tested twelve classification techniques
by applying them to the CKD results. The predictor parameters
used for performance measurement are prognostic accuracy,
precision, sensitivity and specificity. The findings suggest that
the precision of the decision-tree has been reached of 98.6%,
sensitivity of 97.20, exactness of one, and specificity of one
[7]. Khan et. al. Expected machine learning (ML) strategies
for Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) Prophecy. The dataset
that was taken from the UCI ML pool consisted of 400
instances. The ML algorithms included NBTree, J48, Support
Vector Machine, Logistic Regression, Multi-layer Perceptron,
Naı̈ve Bayes. The findings of the above listed approaches have
been compared with the characterization of the most accurate
methodology for classifying CKD and NOT CKD patients with
high precision. Exactness of the experimental findings used
95.75% for NB, 96.50% for LR, 97.25% for MLP, 97.75%
for J48, 98.25% for SVM, 98.75% for NBTree [8]. Polat et.
al. Define selection methods estimated the outcome of the
diagnosis of CKD, based on support vector machines. Two
main types of selection strategies, namely wrapper and filter
approaches, have been selected to scale down the dimension of
the Chronic kidney disease dataset. The wrapper method was
accompanied by classification sub-sets of evaluators of greedy
incremental programs and wrapper subset evaluators with the
simplest first program. The association sub-set evaluator with
greedy step-by-step program and sub-set evaluator with the
shortest filter approach is the approach to the filter. The
findings revealed that the Help Vector Machine classifier
features a higher accuracy rate when using the filtered subset
evaluator with the simplest first software feature selection
process (98.5%) within the diagnosis of CKD compared to
other selected methods [9]. Radha et. al. The classification
algorithms were expected to be taken into consideration for
978-1-7281-8501-9/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO. Downloaded on May 25,2021 at 13:02:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
the diagnosis of Chronic Kidney Disease. On entirely different
algorithms such as Naive Bayes, Decision Tree, K-Nearest
Neighbor, and Support Vector Machine, the expected results
were carried out. The expected outcome suggests that the K-
Nearest Neighbour algorithm delivers a better outcome than
the other classification algorithms and generates 98% accuracy
[10]. Serpen et. al. The outcome of diagnosis rule extraction
was redicted from patient data for Chronic Kidney Disease
(CKD). To devise a bunch of designation rules for CKD, the
C4.5 decision tree rule was added to the patient data. For a
cumulative patient count of 400, they appropriately categorized
393 patients and wrongly classified seven cases. Predicted ac-
curacy was obtained by the C4.5 algorithm using 3-fold cross-
validation 98.25% [11]. Ahmad et. al.The findings predicted
whether or not kidney failure patients had reached a stage of
progressive kidney disease. The methodology of this thesis
consisted of 2 main phases: simulation of classification and
development of the scheme. Modeling of classification con-
sists of gathering information, planning data, grouping data,
classification, extracting rules. It was expected that this device
would help the doctor in determining on the chronic condition
of patients with kidney failure with sufficient precision. The
performance of this structure was 98.34% [12]. Hosseinzadeh
et. al. The planned diagnostic model for chronic nephrosis on
the network of things platform. The tools of classification were
the Judgment Treaties (J48), SVM, MLP and Naı̈ve Bayes.The
experimental data shows that 97% precision, 99% sensitivity
and 95% specificity through the decision tree (J48) classifica-
tor relative to the support vector machines (SVM), multilayer
perceptron (MLP) classifiers and naı̈ve bayes classifiers are
obtained by the implemented data collection with its suggested
elect choices. Furthermore, the proposed feature set increases
execution time relative to numerous data sets with entirely
different choices [13].
TABLE I
P ERFORMANCE C OMPARISON OF CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE FROM
EXISTING MODELS
Author Model Result
Amirgaliyev [4] SVM 93.1%
Sinha [6] SVM, KNN 73.75%, 78.75%
Sharma [7] Decision tree 98%
Serpen [11] Decision tree 98%
Ahmad [12] Classification 98%
modeling
Hosseinzadeh Decision tree 97%
[13] (J48), SVM,
MLP, and Naı̈ve
Bayes strategies
III. M ETHODOLOGY
This section divided into ten subsections: proposed model,
algorithms description, data descriptions, data prepossessing,
feature extraction, machine learning classifier, cross validation,
evaluation metrics, confusion metrics and best model.
714
 Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies [ICICT 2021]
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP21F70-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-8501-9
A. Proposed Model
The procedures for execution are illustrated in this section.
Python and the Scikit-learn library have been used to carry
out the research. In fig 1, generate a diagram for procedure of
Proposed model.
Data Input
Data Preprocssing
Feature Extraction
Machine Learning
Classifier
Cross Validation
Precision ROC
Recall TP rate
Evaluation Metrics
F measure TN rate
Best classifier
Fig. 1. Implementation Procedure of Chronic Kidney Disease
B. Algorithms Description
Naive Bayes: The classifiers of Naive Bayes are a group of
classification algorithms that are logically centered in Bayes.
It’s not a single algorithm, but a family of algorithms where
they all share a similar definition.
Logistic regression: Logistics regression is a mathematical
model that, while there are many more complicated extensions,
uses logistical functions in its basic form to model a binary de-
pendent variable. Regression analysis measures logistics model
parameters by logistic regression (a form of binary regression).
The statistical Binary Logistic Model has a dependent variable
of two possible values, for example pass/fail, suggesting the
two values ”0” or ”1”.
MLP: The multi-layer perceptron MLP classifier is a feed-
forward artificial neural network model that maps input data
sets to a compatible output range. The term MLP is used
ambiguously, often loosely for any feed-forward ANN, often
explicitly to refer to networks composed of several layers of
perceptions.
SGD Classifier: Stochastic Gradient Descent ( SGD) is very
effective approach to fitting convex loss functions with linear
978-1-7281-8501-9/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO. Downloaded on May 25,2021 at 13:02:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
classifiers and regressors. It needs number of hyper parame-
ters.
AdaBoost: AdaBoost was originally designed to improve
the efficiency of binary classifiers as an ensemble learning
process (also known as ”meta learning.”) AdaBoost uses an
iterative approach to learn from and improve the errors of
weak classifiers.
Bagging Classifier: The Bagging Classifier is a collection of
meta-estimators that fits each base classifier into the random
subsets of the original dataset and then aggregates their indi-
vidual predictions to make the final prediction. It’s commonly
used to reduce a black-box estimator’s variance.
Decision Tree Classifier: Tree-like structures are used in
Decision Tree classification. The root nodes means conditions
and child nodes means the class label. Branches of the root
nodes means effects of the conditions.
Random Forest Classifier: It is a learning algorithm based
on an ensemble tree. A selection of decision trees from the
randomly chosen training set subset is the Random Forest
Classifier. To evaluate the final class it takes votes from the
different decision trees [14] [15].
C. Data Description
In this paper, 400 chronic kidney disease datasets are
used from the UCI machine learning repository [16]. In this
dataset, there are 25 attributes, 24 are predictive variables
and 1 attribute is decision class. Now we discuss briefly our
all attributes.
Age: This attribute represents the age in years of a person. It
is a numeric value and it is a predictive variable.
Bp: This attribute means blood pressure and it is a numeric
value and it is a predictive variable.
Sg: This attribute means specific gravity and its value is
numeric. It is a predictive variable.
Al: This attribute means albumin. its value is numeric. It is a
predictive variable.
Su: This attribute means sugar. its value is numeric. It is a
predictive variable.
Rbc: This attribute means red blood cells. its value is
nominal. It is a predictive variable.
Pc: This attribute means pus cell. its value is nominal. It is a
predictive variable.
Pcc: This attribute means pus cell clumps. its value is
nominal. It is a predictive variable.
Ba: This attribute means bacteria. its value is nominal. It is a
predictive variable.
Bgr: This attribute means blood glucose random. its value is
numeric. It is a predictive variable.
Bu: This attribute means blood urea. its value is numeric. It
is a predictive variable.
Sc: This attribute means serum creatinine. its value is
numeric. It is a predictive variable.
Sod: This attribute means sodium. its value is numeric. It is
a predictive variable.
Pot: This attribute means potassium. its value is numeric. It
is a predictive variable.
715
 Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies [ICICT 2021]
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP21F70-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-8501-9
Hemo: This attribute means hemoglobin. its value is numeric.
It is a predictive variable.
Pcv: This attribute means packed cell volume. its value is
numeric. It is a predictive variable.
Wc: This attribute means white blood cell count. its value is
numeric. It is a predictive variable.
Rc: This attribute means red blood cell count. its value is
numeric. It is a predictive variable.
Htn: This attribute means hypertension. its value is nominal.
It is a predictive variable.
Dm: This attribute means diabetes mellitus. its value is
nominal. It is a predictive variable.
Cad: This attribute means coronary artery disease. its value
is nominal. It is a predictive variable.
Appet: This attribute means appetite. its value is nominal. It
is a predictive variable.
Pe: This attribute means pedal edema. its value is nominal.
It is a predictive variable.
Ane: This attribute means anemia. its value is nominal. It is
a predictive variable.
Class: It is the response attribute. A person having chronic
kidney disease or not having chronic kidney disease are given
here. And this variable is a nominal type.
D. Data Preprocessing
In this dataset, total 25 attributes are used, 24 are predictive
variables and 1 is response variable. In predictive 24 attributes
some attributes are nominal some attributes are numerical.
Therefore convert nominal attributes into numerical attributes
using a mapping function. In this dataset, the nominal value
contains rbc, appet, pc, pcc, ba, dm, htn, cad, pe, ane this
attribute we convert this a numeric value using a mapping
function. And now our data set is full of numeric value.
Moreover splitting the dataset into 80% for training and 20%
for testing use.
E. Feature Extraction
In this section, from fig 2 shown feature extraction using
principle component analysis. In principle component analysis
we colour into two type red and green. The red colour
represent CKD and the green colour represent not NOT CKD
F. Machine Learning Classifier
This study is performed using eight machine learning
algorithms to evaluate the CKD or NOT CKD performance.
This algorithms are: Naive Bayes(NB), Logistic
Regression(LR), Multilayer Perceptron(MLP), Stochastic
Gradient Descent(SGD), Adaptive Boosting(Adaboost),
Bagging, Decision Tree(DT), and Random Forest(RF).
G. Cross Validation
Cross validation is a technique for testing machine learning
models by training multiple machine learning techniques on
the available input data subsets and evaluating them on the
978-1-7281-8501-9/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO. Downloaded on May 25,2021 at 13:02:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
complementary data subset. Comparing and selecting a model
or a given predictive modeling problem is commonly used in
applied machine learning because it is simple to grasp, easy
to implement, and results in ability predictions that usually
have a smaller bias than other methods. Since small numbers
are in our data collection, we use k-fold cross validation. The
data is split into k subsets in K Fold cross validation. Now
the holdout solution is repeated k times such that every time
the test set/validation is used as one of the k subsets and all
the other k-1 subsets are combined to form a training set. In
all k experiments, the error estimate is summed for maximum
efficacy of our model. Which can be shown, each data point is
checked exactly once and is trained in a k-1 times series. As
we use most of the fitting data, this decreases bias considerably
and also considerably reduces variance, as most data are also
used in validation sets. Another drawback of this approach
is that the interchange of training sets and evaluation sets.
K = 5 or 10 is normally optimal as a general rule and an
observational proof, but nothing is set and any meaning can
be taken. We use k(10) fold cross validation to find out our
evaluation metrics.
H. Evaluation Metrics
The outcome results of this study are described briefly as
follows
Precision
P recision or positive predictive value
T RU E P OSIT IV E
=
T RU E P OSIT IV E + F ALSE P OSIT IV E
Recall
T RU E P OSIT IV E
Recall =
T RU E P OSIT IV E + F ALSE N EGAT IV E
F Measure
2 ∗ TP
F 1score =
2 ∗ TP + FP + FN
Accuracy
TP + TN
Accuracy =
TP + TN + FP + FN
I. Confusion Metrics
This figure 3 represents the confusion matrix structure.
• TP means true positive = when a label predicted correctly,
we predicted it is ckd and it is exactly the same.
• FP means false positive = when a label predicted falsely,
we predicted it is ckd but it is not ckd.
• FN means false negative = when a predicted label is
missing, we predicted it is not ckd but it is ckd.
• TN means true negative = when a label is correctly
predicted by another label, we predicted it is not ckd
and in the dataset it is not ckd.
J. Best Model
The degree of precision of the data set is also calculated to
generate accuracy of various types of algorithms and the best
one can be achieved by using a Random Forest classification.
716
 Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies [ICICT 2021]
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP21F70-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-8501-9

2 component PCA
ckd
notckd
8

4
Principal Component 2

−2

−4

−4 −2 0 2 4 6 8
Principal Component 1

Fig. 2. Principle Component Analysis

IV. RESULT ANALYSIS dient Descent(SGD), Adaptive Boosting(Adaboost), Bagging,

The confusion metrics analysis are shown in table II,
therefore confusion metrics analysis is important part of
this research. For achieve good accuracy predicted positive,
predicted negative is more important attribute. In this paper,
Random Forest gives the best outcome from any other
classifiers.
The perform analysis shown in table III using different ma-
chine learning classifiers namely: Naive Bayes(NB), Logistic
Regression(LR), Multilayer Perceptron(MLP), Stochastic Gra-
Decision Tree(DT), Random Forest(RF). Moreover the highest
value from the random forest(RF) classifier and it accuracy is
99%. The second highest accuracy achieved from MLP, SGD,
and Decision Tree classifiers and value are 98%. The lowest
accuracy we get from the Naive Bayes(NB) classifier and
value is 95%. Second lowest accuracy we gain from Logistic
Regression classifier and it is 96%. This all the result section
of this paper focus to find out best outcome of every classifier

978-1-7281-8501-9/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE 717

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO. Downloaded on May 25,2021 at 13:02:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies [ICICT 2021]
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP21F70-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-8501-9

TABLE II
C ONFUSION METRICS ANALYSIS FOR OUR APPLIED CLASSIFIER

Model Label Predictive Positive Predictive Negative

Naive Bayes CKD 229 21
NOT CKD 1 149
Logistic CKD 239 11
NOT CKD 7 143
MLP CKD 241 9
NOT CKD 1 149
SGD CKD 243 7
NOT CKD 0 150
AdaBoost CKD 243 7
NOT CKD 8 142
Bagging CKD 246 4
NOT CKD 7 143
Decision tree CKD 249 1
NOT CKD 9 141
Random forest CKD 249 1
NOT CKD 3 147

TABLE III
E VALUATION METRICS ANALYSIS OF OUR USES CLASSIFIER

Model Accuracy Label Precision Recall F Score ROC TP FP

Naive Bayes 95% CKD 0.99 0.91 0.95 0.99 0.91 0.00
NOT CKD 0.87 0.99 0.93 0.99 0.08
Logistic 96% CKD 0.97 0.95 0.96 0.98 0.95 0.04
NOT CKD 0.92 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.04
MLP 98% CKD 0.99 0.96 0.98 0.99 0.96 0.00
NOT CKD 0.94 0.99 0.96 0.99 0.03
SGD 98% CKD 1.00 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.00
NOT CKD 0.95 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.02
AdaBoost 96% CKD 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.99 0.97 0.05
NOT CKD 0.95 0.94 0.95 0.94 0.02
Bagging 97% CKD 0.97 0.98 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.04
NOT CKD 0.97 0.95 0.96 0.95 0.01
Decision tree 98% CKD 0.96 0.99 0.98 0.97 0.99 0.06
NOT CKD 0.99 0.94 0.96 0.94 0.00
Random forest 99% CKD 0.98 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.99 0.02
NOT CKD 0.99 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00

V. CONCLUSION

Chronic kidney disease(CKD) describes the significant loss

of kidney function, also called chronic kidney failure. Kidneys
filter the wastes and excess blood fluids from the blood
and then excreted in the urine. Dangerous levels of fluid,
electrolytes, and waste can build-up in the body when chronic
kidney disease reaches an advanced stage. CKD raises the risk
of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and cardiovascular disease,
and other risk factors for heart disease, such as elevated blood
lipids, are also found in individuals with CKD. In individuals
with CKD, the most common cause of death is cardiovascular
disease rather than kidney failure. Kidney disease or chronic
kidney disease is not a minor issue for a person’s health. It
will be a death cause for a person, so everyone needs to be
concerned about his health to prevent this in the very early
stage of his or her life. In this paper, several machine learning
classifiers have been used to find out best accuracy, ROC,
Fig. 3. Confusion Metrics Structure
precision, recall and f measure. However random forest gives
the 99% accuracy and its ROC value is also highest.

978-1-7281-8501-9/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE 718

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO. Downloaded on May 25,2021 at 13:02:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies [ICICT 2021]
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP21F70-ART; ISBN: 978-1-7281-8501-9

R EFERENCES
[1] Schmidt, M. I., Duncan, B. B., Sharrett, A. R., Lindberg, G., Savage, P. J.,
Offenbacher, S., ... & ARIC investigators. (1999). Markers of inflamma-
tion and prediction of diabetes mellitus in adults (Atherosclerosis Risk in
Communities study): a cohort study. The Lancet, 353(9165), 1649-1652.
[2] Wikipedia contributors. (2020, December 2). Chronic kidney disease. In
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 09:48, December 3, 2020,
from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php
[3] Wikipedia contributors. (2020, November 21). Coronary arteries. In
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 09:50, December 3, 2020,
from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php
[4] Amirgaliyev, Y., Shamiluulu, S., Serek, A. (2018, October). Analysis of
chronic kidney disease dataset by applying machine learning methods. In
2018 IEEE 12th International Conference on Application of Information
and Communication Technologies (AICT) (pp. 1-4). IEEE.
[5] Charleonnan, A., Fufaung, T., Niyomwong, T., Chokchueypattanakit, W.,
Suwannawach, S., Ninchawee, N. (2016, October). Predictive analytics
for chronic kidney disease using machine learning techniques. In 2016
Management and Innovation Technology International Conference (MITi-
con) (pp. MIT-80). IEEE.
[6] Sinha, P., Sinha, P. (2015). Comparative study of chronic kidney disease
prediction using KNN and SVM. International Journal of Engineering
Research and Technology, 4(12), 608-12.
[7] Sharma, S., Sharma, V., Sharma, A. (2016). Performance based eval-
uation of various machine learning classification techniques for chronic
kidney disease diagnosis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.09581.
[8] Khan, B., Naseem, R., Muhammad, F., Abbas, G., Kim, S. (2020).
An Empirical Evaluation of Machine Learning Techniques for Chronic
Kidney Disease Prophecy. IEEE Access, 8, 55012-55022.
[9] Polat, H., Mehr, H. D., Cetin, A. (2017). Diagnosis of chronic kidney
disease based on support vector machine by feature selection methods.
Journal of medical systems, 41(4), 55.
[10] Radha, N., Ramya, S. (2015). Performance analysis of machine learning
algorithms for predicting chronic kidney disease. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Eng.
Open Access, 3, 72-76.
[11] Serpen, A. A. (2016). Diagnosis rule extraction from patient data for
chronic kidney disease using machine learning. International Journal of
Biomedical and Clinical Engineering (IJBCE), 5(2), 64-72.
[12] Ahmad, M., Tundjungsari, V., Widianti, D., Amalia, P., Rachmawati, U.
A. (2017, November). Diagnostic decision support system of chronic kid-
ney disease using support vector machine. In 2017 Second International
Conference on Informatics and Computing (ICIC) (pp. 1-4). IEEE.
[13] Hosseinzadeh, M., Koohpayehzadeh, J., Bali, A. O., Asghari, P., Souri,
A., Mazaherinezhad, A., ... & Rawassizadeh, R. (2020). A diagnostic
prediction model for chronic kidney disease in internet of things platform.
Multimedia Tools and Applications, 1-18.
[14] M. U. Emon, M. S. Keya, T. I. Meghla, M. M. Rahman, M. S. A.
Mamun and M. S. Kaiser, ”Performance Analysis of Machine Learning
Approaches in Stroke Prediction,” 2020 4th International Conference on
Electronics, Communication and Aerospace Technology (ICECA), Coim-
batore, 2020, pp. 1464-1469, doi: 10.1109/ICECA49313.2020.9297525.
[15] M. A. Islam, M. S. Islam, M. S. Hossen, M. U. Emon, M. S. Keya
and A. Habib, ”Machine Learning based Image Classification of Papaya
Disease Recognition,” 2020 4th International Conference on Electronics,
Communication and Aerospace Technology (ICECA), Coimbatore, 2020,
pp. 1353-1360, doi: 10.1109/ICECA49313.2020.9297570.
[16] Dua, D. and Graff, C. (2019). UCI Machine Learning Repository
http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml. Irvine, CA: University of California, School
of Information and Computer Science.

978-1-7281-8501-9/21/$31.00 ©2021 IEEE 719

Authorized licensed use limited to: UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO. Downloaded on May 25,2021 at 13:02:02 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.