MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Restoring insulin production for type 1 diabetes

2012· review· en· W1867944679 on OpenAlexafffund
Eva Tudurí, Jennifer E. Bruin, Timothy J. Kieffer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Diabetes · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Diabetes Association
KeywordsMedicineInsulinTransplantationIsletDiabetes mellitusInduced pluripotent stem cellType 2 diabetesType 1 diabetesPancreasEmbryonic stem cellInternal medicineEndocrinologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current therapies for the treatment of type 1 diabetes include daily administration of exogenous insulin and, less frequently, whole-pancreas or islet transplantation. Insulin injections often result in inaccurate insulin doses, exposing the patient to hypo- and/or hyperglycemic episodes that lead to long-term complications. Islet transplantation is also limited by lack of high-quality islet donors, early graft failure, and chronic post-transplant immunosuppressive treatment. These barriers could be circumvented by designing a safe and efficient strategy to restore insulin production within the patient's body. Porcine islets have been considered as a possible alternative source of transplantable insulin-producing cells to replace human cadaveric islets. More recently, embryonic or induced pluripotent stem cells have also been examined for their ability to differentiate in vitro into pancreatic endocrine cells. Alternatively, it may be feasible to generate new β-cells by ectopic expression of key transcription factors in endogenous non-β-cells. Finally, engineering surrogate β-cells by in vivo delivery of the insulin gene to specific tissues is also being studied as a possible therapy for type 1 diabetes. In the present review, we discuss these different approaches to restore insulin production.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.129
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of DiabetesSame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207