The combination oral and nutritional treatment of late‐onset diabetes mellitus (CONTROL DM) trial results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of short-term improvements in glycaemic control on brachial artery endothelial function as a marker of cardiovascular health. METHODS: Persons with Type 2 diabetes who were poorly controlled on oral therapy were randomly assigned to monotherapy with repaglinide or combination therapy with repaglinide plus metformin. Brachial artery flow-mediated vasodilation was assessed by ultrasonography at randomization and following 16 weeks of therapy. The primary outcome was change in brachial artery endothelial function from baseline. Comparison of randomized groups was a secondary aim. RESULTS: Eighty-six participants were randomized, and 83 were followed to study completion. Post occlusion brachial artery vasodilation was 3.74% at baseline and 3.82% following 16 weeks of therapy (P = 0.77). The treatment effect was 0.08% (95% CI: -0.48%, 0.64%). No difference was seen between treatment groups (P = 0.69). Overall, A1C was reduced from 8.3% to 7.0%, with a greater reduction in the combination therapy group (from 8.4% to 6.7%) than in the monotherapy group (from 8.3% to 7.3%, p for difference between groups = 0.01). Statistically significant reductions were observed in fasting glucose, and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1. Statistically significant increases were observed for fasting insulin, uric acid, weight and BMI. CONCLUSIONS: Brachial artery endothelial function was not influenced by short-term improvements in glycaemic control. The CONTROL DM group was successful in lowering A1C. Future research should explore more intensive and longer-lasting improvements in glycaemic control on endothelial function. Some data previously published in abstract form (Diabetes 2001; 50 (Suppl. 2): A217).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".