High Total Bilirubin as a Protective Factor for Diabetes Mellitus: An Analysis of NHANES Data From 1999 - 2006
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a rampantly growing epidemic in the United States, affecting nearly 10% of the adult population. Studies have shown that higher levels of Total Bilirubin (TBili) convey a protective effect with regard to cardiovascular risk. In this study, we will examine the relationship between TBili level and prevalence of DM to discern whether a similar relationship exists. METHODS: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) is a comprehensive survey performed regularly to evaluate the overall health and nutrition status of the United States population. For the purpose of this study, we combined NHANES data collected between 1999 and 2006. Totally 15,876 eligible participants were selected after excluding all patients younger than twenty years, those with a history of abnormal liver function tests, or those who disclosed a history of liver disease. The data collected on these individuals was adjusted for demographic characteristics, as well as risk factors for DM, and was analyzed via multivariate logistic regression, using SAS proc survey methodology. RESULTS: After age adjustment, increased TBili was associated with 26% reduction in diabetes risk (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.64 - 0.88). Multivariate analysis, adjusting for all diabetes risk factors assessed, confirmed this association (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67 - 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that a higher level of serum TBili is associated with odds of having a lower incidence of DM. This finding supports the hypothesis that the antioxidant nature of TBili, demonstrating a protective effect with regard to the risk of stroke, atherosclerosis, and vasculitis in prior research, also extends to DM risk. Furthermore, research has shown that higher levels of TBili increase glucose mobilization into the cells, leading to more efficient, biologic glucose utilization. There is no doubt that the beneficial effect of TBili is multifactorial; thus further investigation is warranted. KEYWORDS: Bilirubin; Diabetes; Antioxidant; Protective.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".