MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076816278 · doi:10.1002/jppr.1042

The story of metformin continues …

2014· article· en· W2076816278 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sonal Sekhar Miraj, Girish Thunga, A Suhaj

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy Practice and Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetforminMedicineFormularyDrugFood and drug administrationCoining (mint)New drug applicationPharmacologyDiabetes mellitusEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To the Editor,We write to reflect upon the unusual 'journey' of the antidiabetic drug metformin, an agent with a story that is somewhat different from the other drugs.It is sometimes the case that a new drug will be introduced with great promises, but over the course of time may eventually be withdrawn from markets because of safety concerns.In the case of metformin, the drug was regarded with suspicion during the initial years of its availability, and was even banned in many countries including the USA.1,2 Time has changed the fate of the drug, and it is now one of the most prescribed oral hypoglycaemic drugs in the world, either alone or in combination products.The interesting tale of metformin begins with its synthesis by Werner and Bell in 1922 in Dublin.In 1929, Slotta and Tschesche demonstrated its glycaemic effects in rabbits.After this many years elapsed before attention was once again focused upon metformin (the discovery of insulin was also unfolding during this period).The French physician, Sterne was the first to test metformin on humans for the therapy of diabetes, coining the name 'Glucophage' (glucose eater) for metformin.Metformin found a place in British National Formulary in 1958, and was approved in Canada in 1972, but another two decades elapsed before it gained approval from the US Food and Drug Administration.Glucophage was first branded formulation of metformin marketed in the USA in 1995.In more recent times, it is of interest to note the latest World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines (18th edition from April 2013) references only two oral antidiabetics (metformin and glibenclamide).Despite beneficial effects of metformin (less hypoglycaemia and lost weight) reported in well-regarded journals, the wider acceptance of metformin took a very long time, mostly because of apprehension regarding lactic acidosis (as was observed with phenformin).The UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS), one of the benchmark studies, has explored the benefits of metformin, revealing that its use confers reduced risk of myocardial infarction and overall mortality.1 This finding lends support for selection of metformin as a first choice drug for type 2 diabetes in obese and overweight patients.Finally, in 2012, diabetes experts from the USA and Europe declared metformin should be the first drug choice for all patients with type 2 diabetes, completing a rather long journey to this endpoint.2 .......

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0110.013
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0090.023
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.015

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.394 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 Pharmacy Practice and ResearchSame topicMetabolism, Diabetes, and CancerFrench-language works237,207