Association between smoking, insulin resistance and β‐cell function in a North‐western First Nation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Aboriginal peoples have a high prevalence of smoking and are at major risk for diabetes. The role of insulin resistance vs. compromised beta-cell function in the link between smoking and glycaemic disease is not clear. This study tested whether relations between insulin resistance and beta-cell function differ between current smokers, former smokers and non-smokers, and if having diabetes modifies smoking-related effects. METHODS: A community-based diabetes screening initiative was mounted for a North-western First Nation (Interior Salishan) in rural British Columbia, Canada. Respondents were on-reserve Aboriginal people (n=156), all adults 18+ years. Glycaemic status was determined by oral glucose tolerance test. Fasting values for glucose and insulin were used to estimate beta-cell function and insulin resistance by homeostasis model assessment (HOMA). Analyses adjusted for age, sex, alcohol intake, education, body mass index and physical activity. RESULTS: For normoglycaemic persons (n=119) current smokers relative to non-smokers had high beta-cell values [difference (95% confidence interval) 19.5 (17.1, 21.9)], while former smokers had low beta-cell values [difference -22.8 (-20.3, -25.3)] (P<0.0001). For diabetic persons (n=37) differences were of equivalent direction but greater magnitude (P<0.0001). Insulin resistance was for normoglycaemic persons highest for current smokers, and for diabetic persons lowest for current smokers (P=0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Former smoking is associated with low beta-cell function, and current smoking with high beta-cell function, independent of diabetes in the North-western First Nation surveyed. Associations between smoking and insulin resistance vary according to glycaemic status. Smoking may have diametric acute and post-cessation effects on beta-cell function and insulin resistance.
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) | 0.000 | 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".