Understanding diabetic teratogenesis: Where are we now and where are we going?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maternal pregestational diabetes (type 1 or type 2) poses an increased risk for a broad spectrum of birth defects. To our knowledge, this problem first came to the attention of the Teratology Society at the 14th Annual Meeting in Vancouver, B.C. in 1974, with a presentation by Lewis Holmes, "Etiologic heterogeneity of neural tube defects". Although advances in the control of diabetes in the decades since the discovery of insulin in the 1920's have reduced the risk for birth defects during diabetic pregnancy, the increasing incidence of diabetes among women of childbearing years indicates that this cause of birth defects is a growing public health concern. Major advances in understanding how a disease of maternal fuel metabolism can interfere with embryogenesis of multiple organ systems have been made in recent years. In this review, we trace the history of the study of diabetic teratogenesis and discuss a model in which tissue-specific developmental control genes are regulated at specific times in embryonic development by glucose metabolism. The major function of such genes is to suppress apoptosis, perhaps to preserve proliferative capability, and inhibit premature senescence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".