Changes in levels of haemoglobin A<sub>1c</sub>during the first 6 years after diagnosis of clinical type 2 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the variability in levels of glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) during the first six years after diagnosis of clinical type 2 diabetes in relation to possible predictors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were from a population-based sample from general practice of 581 newly diagnosed diabetic patients aged 40 or over. Estimation of HbA(1c) was centralized. The changes in levels of HbA(1c) were described by HbA(1c) at diagnosis and a regression line fitted to the HbA(1c) measurements after 1-year follow-up for each patient. The predictive effect of patient characteristics for changes in HbA(1c) was investigated in a multivariate mixed model. RESULTS: During the first year after diabetes diagnosis, HbA(1c) dropped to near normal average level and then started rising almost linearly. A sharp rise in long-term glycaemic level was observed in approximately a quarter of the patients, especially the relatively young. Of 581 patients, 156 (26.9%) patients, however, experienced a fall in HbA(1c) after 1-year follow-up and another quarter showed constant or only slowly rising HbA(1c). The changes in levels of HbA(1c) were only predicted by diagnostic HbA(1c) and age. CONCLUSIONS: During the first 6 years after the diagnosis of clinical type 2 diabetes, changes in levels of HbA(1c) show considerable inter-individual variability with age as the only long-term predictor. The results indicate that it is important to monitor changes in HbA(1c) more closely and intensify treatment of those often relatively young patients who actually experience the beginning of an apparently relentless deterioration of their glycaemic control.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".