MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042081671 · doi:10.1177/1932296814554415

The Chronic Injury Glucose Error Grid

2014· article· en· W2042081671 on OpenAlexaff
Jan S. Krouwer, George S. Cembrowski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Diabetes Science and Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsAlberta HealthAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGridDiabetes mellitusObservational errorGlucose meterComputer scienceError analysisStatisticsMathematicsEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional glucose error grids provide error limits for glucose meters. These criteria help to assess the meter's suitability to prevent acute injury. We present a rationale for an error grid that provides a different set of error limits to help prevent chronic injury in diabetes. For example, glucose values in the no treatment zone of a traditional error grid could be harmful in diabetic retinopathy. The same method comparison data informs both the acute and chronic injury error grids. All of the data are used in an acute injury error grid, whereas only long-term biases populate a chronic injury error grid. These biases can be due to reagent lots and patient specific interferences. An example of a chronic injury glucose error grid is provided using simulated data.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Diabetes Science and TechnologySame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207