Safety of once‐daily insulin detemir in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with oral hypoglycemic agents in routine clinical practice (在常规临床实践中使用口服降糖药治疗的2型糖尿病患者每日一次使用地特胰岛素治疗的安全性)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to identify demographic and treatment factors that were predictive of hypoglycemia in a large cohort of type 2 diabetic patients initiating insulin detemir. METHODS: The present 24-week observational study of insulin initiation included 17 374 participants from 10 countries. Severe hypoglycemia was defined as an event requiring third party assistance; minor hypoglycemia was defined as a daytime or nocturnal glucose measurement <3.1 mmol/L. RESULTS: Prior to initiating insulin therapy, 4.9% of the cohort reported hypoglycemia (pre-insulin hypoglycemia), with most (94.2%) reporting minor events and 9.6% reporting severe events. Compared with patients without pre-insulin hypoglycemia, those with pre-insulin hypoglycemia had a higher incidence of events of minor hypoglycemia (1.72 vs 4.46 events per patient-year [ppy], respectively), nocturnal hypoglycemia (0.25 vs 1.09 events ppy, respectively), and severe hypoglycemia (<0.01 vs 0.04 events ppy, respectively) at final visit. Age (P < 0.047), body mass index (P < 0.001), a prior history of microvascular disease (P < 0.001), pre-insulin hypoglycemia (P < 0.001), increased number of oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs; P < 0.001), OHA intensification (P < 0.001), and the use of glinides (P = 0.004) were all found to be independently associated with the occurrence of hypoglycemia during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily insulin detemir therapy was safe and effective, and rates of hypoglycemia were low. Concerns about hypoglycemia should not deter the initiation of basal insulin analogs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".