MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061292991 · doi:10.1089/dia.2006.8.165

Assessment of Glycemic Control After Islet Transplantation Using the Continuous Glucose Monitor in Insulin-Independent Versus Insulin-Requiring Type 1 Diabetes Subjects

2006· article· en· W2061292991 on OpenAlexaff
Breay W. Paty, Peter Senior, Jonathan R.T. Lakey, A. M. James Shapiro, Edmond A. Ryan

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Technology & Therapeutics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic function and diabetes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlycemicMedicineInsulinDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineType 1 diabetesIsletTransplantationEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess and compare glycemic control using the continuous glucose monitor (CGMS, Medtronic Minimed, Northridge, CA) in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) subjects who are insulin-independent versus those who require insulin after islet transplantation alone (ITA). METHODS: Glycemic control was assessed using 72-h CGMS in eight T1DM subjects who were insulin-independent after ITA (ITA-II), eight T1DM subjects who were C-peptide-positive but insulin-requiring after ITA (ITA-IR), and eight non-transplanted (NT) T1DM subjects. RESULTS: Standard deviation of glucose values was not significantly different between ITA-II and ITA-IR subjects (ITA-II, 1.2 +/- 0.1 mM; ITA-IR, 2.0 +/- 0.3 mM; P = 0.072). Both ITA groups were more stable than NT subjects (NT, 3.3 +/- 0.3 mM; P = 0.001 vs. ITA). Mean high glucose values were significantly lower in ITA subjects compared with NT subjects (ITA-II, 10.5 +/- 0.6 mM; ITA-IR, 13.0 +/- 1.0 mM; NT, 16.1 +/- 1.1 mM; P = 0.002). Mean average glucose values were not significantly different among all groups (ITA-I, 6.7 +/- 0.2 mM; ITA-IR, 7.8 +/- 0.3 mM; NT, 7.7 +/- 0.6 mM; P = 0.198). Mean low glucose values were significantly higher in both ITA groups compared with NT subjects (ITA-II, 4.5 +/- 0.2 mM; ITA-IR, 4.3 +/- 0.3 mM; NT, 3.0 +/- 0.2 mM; P = 0.003). Duration of hypoglycemic excursions (<3.0 mM) was markedly reduced in both ITA groups (ITA-II, 0%; ITA-IR, 2.4 +/- 0.2%; NT, 11.8 +/- 4.2%). Glycated hemoglobin was not significantly different between ITA groups (ITA-II, 6.4 +/- 0.2%; ITA-IR, 6.5 +/- 0.3%) and was significantly higher in NT subjects (8.3 +/- 0.2%; P < 0.001 vs. ITA). CONCLUSIONS: CGMS monitoring demonstrates that glycemic lability and hypoglycemia are significantly reduced in C-peptide-positive islet transplant recipients, whether or not supplementary, exogenous insulin is used, compared with non-transplanted T1DM subjects.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations60
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes Technology & TherapeuticsSame topicPancreatic function and diabetesFrench-language works237,207