Is There a Predisposition to Intestinal Parasitosis in Diabetic Patients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although intestinal parasites usually create benign diseases, sometimes they may cause complications with high mortality and morbidity (1,2). It is known that diabetic patients are more susceptible to bacterial infections. Decreased arterial perfusion, neuropathy, and suppressed immune response in diabetes aggravate the frequency and severity of infectious diseases (3). Lymphocyte and polymorphonuclear leukocyte functions are altered (4). The most prominent alteration is the phagocytic functions of polymorphonuclear leukocytes (5,6). It has also been reported that candidal infections occur more frequently in diabetic patients than in nondiabetic control subjects (7,8). Is a similar kind of predisposition present against parasitic infections, particularly against the intestinal parasites in diabetic patients? There is no adequate study about this subject. Therefore, we assessed whether there is a predisposition against intestinal parasites in the diabetic population by comparing their prevalence in diabetic and nondiabetic individuals living in the Sanliurfa province, which lies in southeast Anatolia. …
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".