MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057154197 · doi:10.1089/dia.2009.0042

Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in the Management of Severe Hypoglycemia

2009· article· en· W2057154197 on OpenAlexaff
Edmond A. Ryan, Judy C. Germsheid

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Technology & Therapeutics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContinuous glucose monitoringHypoglycemiaDiabetes mellitusBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringIntensive care medicineDiabetes managementEmergency medicineType 1 diabetesEndocrinologyType 2 diabetes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Severe hypoglycemia can have a dramatic impact on daily life for people with diabetes. Hypoglycemia is quantifiable by the HYPO-Score derived from the frequency of severe hypoglycemia over a year and a component based on 4 weeks of glucose records. The latter gives a modified HYPO-Score as a short-term measure of hypoglycemia. We used a continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) in patients with severe hypoglycemia to assess if we could decrease hypoglycemia as measured by the modified HYPO-Score. METHODS: Sixteen type 1 diabetes subjects, 52.0 +/- 2.3 years old with a diabetes duration of 29.4 +/- 2.8 years having problematic hypoglycemia were enrolled. All used multiple daily insulin injections, and the glycosylated hemoglobin level was 8.4 +/- 0.3%. After a month of gathering hypoglycemia information for baseline modified HYPO-Score, subjects wore the CGMS for 2 months, and a modified HYPO-Score was repeated. To assess long-term benefit, CGMS was then discontinued for 3 months, and a final modified HYPO-Score was determined. RESULTS: The modified HYPO-Score decreased from 857 +/- 184 to 444 +/- 92 (P = 0.055) (intention-to-treat basis). Further analysis of the modified HYPO-Score when the CGMS was actually functioning showed it decreased from 857 +/- 184 to 366 +/- 86 (P = 0.023). Severe hypoglycemia episodes dropped from 16 at baseline to three when wearing the CGMS. The number of hypoglycemia episodes <3.0 mmol/L dropped from 8.6 +/- 1.5 to 4.7 +/- 0.9 (P = 0.01). Subjects expressed less fear of hypoglycemia with CGMS. In 11 who completed modified Final Month HYPO-Scores, the number of severe hypoglycemic events rose to six. At study end, 13 of 16 subjects elected to continue using the CGMS. CONCLUSIONS: When the CGMS was worn and functioning there was a significant decrease in the modified HYPO-Score and number of hypoglycemic values <3.0 mmol/L.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 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

Citations22
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes Technology & TherapeuticsSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207