Comorbidity and glycemia control among patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reports on the relationship between comorbidity and glycemia control in diabetic patients are conflicting and the method of measuring comorbidity varies widely among studies. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the relationship between diabetes control and comorbidity, taking into account all comorbidities and their severity, in a primary care setting. We performed a retrospective descriptive study based on chart review of 96 randomly selected type 2 diabetic patients. Comorbidity was measured with the cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS), an exhaustive comorbidity index. Diabetes was considered as controlled if the mean value of two measurements of glycosylated hemoglobin A (HbA(1c)) was less than 7%. Taking diabetes control as the dependent variable, its relationship with the CIRS score, age, sex, diabetes duration, and diabetes-related complications was explored. Diabetes control was not significantly related with the CIRS score, age, sex or diabetes severity. Diabetes duration was the only variable significantly related to diabetes control. Our study suggests that comorbidity measured with the CIRS in patients with type 2 diabetes is not a factor that prevents the achievement of a good glycemia control.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".