MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sociodemographic and psychosocial factors associated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in adolescents with type 1 diabetes

2009· article· en· W2018850890 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sandra Cortina, David R. Repaske, Korey K. Hood

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Diabetes · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesBayer Canada
KeywordsPsychosocialMedicineType 1 diabetesLogistic regressionGlycemicDiabetes mellitusInsulin pumpDiabetes managementType 2 diabetesPediatricsInternal medicinePsychiatryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the role of sociodemographic factors and psychosocial adjustment in continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) use among adolescents with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: A total of 150 adolescents with type 1 diabetes and their caregivers completed measures of general psychological functioning, diabetes functioning, and stressful life events. Blood glucose monitoring (BGM) frequency and glycemic control were also assessed. Logistic regression was used to determine associations between CSII use and sociodemograpic and psychosocial factors. RESULTS: All logistic regression models were significant, indicating a large proportion of the variance in CSII use was associated with sociodemographic, diabetes-specific and psychosocial variables. Final models showed higher frequency of BGM and having private insurance as significant correlates of CSII use. CSII use was also associated with adolescent and caregiver reports of sharing of responsibilities around diabetes management and negative affect regarding BGM. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents currently prescribed CSII therapy evidenced key differences from their counterparts using multiple daily injections (MDI) in insurance status, diabetes management behavior, and family functioning related to diabetes. Efforts to understand the role of family factors in the maintenance of CSII therapy with clinical indicators of CSII use may inform treatment effectiveness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric DiabetesSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207