{"id":"W2159244155","doi":"10.1136/medethics-2011-100086","title":"Testing relationships: ethical arguments for screening for type 2 diabetes mellitus with HbA1C","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Medical Ethics","topic":"Diabetes Management and Research","field":"Medicine","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"Institute of Population and Public Health; University of Calgary","funders":"Canadian Institutes of Health Research","keywords":"Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus; Disadvantaged; Medicine; Health care; Diabetes mellitus; Population; Ethical issues; Glycated haemoglobin; Type 2 diabetes; Intensive care medicine; Engineering ethics; Political science; Environmental health; Law; Engineering","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.1033892,0.0008048253,0.001158114,0.00139837,0.01251529,0.01134382,0.003277326,0.04368071,0.003969969],"category_scores_gemma":[0.2065582,0.0005818479,0.001724594,0.001255947,0.06047622,0.01637645,0.008704836,0.03140111,0.001222541],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005810223,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01003934,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002101148,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001574711,"domain_scores_codex":[0.817273,0.1482387,0.005144148,0.004743257,0.01914427,0.005456489],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.6962864,0.2652278,0.01380404,0.005034697,0.01326347,0.006383541],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00005721767,0.00005888668,0.0008488385,0.000170815,0.00002206956,0.001184791,0.01011535,0.0001536108,0.0001927852,0.9317429,0.04665819,0.008794514],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001379127,0.0001746301,0.001093072,0.001374331,0.00006873952,0.00430019,0.01093966,0.001375768,0.0007930368,0.6798977,0.2997147,0.0001301696],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","genre_scores_codex":[0.005238994,0.003032714,0.004855827,0.9592395,0.002575036,0.00004537508,0.00001395576,0.0000143725,0.02498423],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.2746924,0.002464824,0.006777127,0.7026901,0.006430867,0.000281802,0.0000174854,0.00004120608,0.006604102],"genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1033892,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5467807,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.3755771195750681,"score_gpt":0.4379292191468275,"score_spread":0.06235209957175941,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}