MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Treatment and Outcomes of Diabetic Muscle Infarction

2005· review· en· W2087023261 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJCR Journal of Clinical Rheumatology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMuscle and Compartmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusInfarctionSurgeryConservative treatmentMyocardial infarctionMagnetic resonance imagingInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diabetic patients can develop spontaneous infarctions of muscle. The optimal treatment of this diabetic muscle infarction (DMI) is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This analysis was conducted to compare the outcomes of conservative, medical, and surgical treatments of DMI. The primary outcome is the time to recovery. Secondary outcomes include recurrence and mortality rates. METHODS: A MEDLINE search from its inception to December 2002 was used to identify reported cases of DMI. We selected those cases that reported on specified baseline characteristics of the patients, including age, gender, duration of diabetes, type of diabetes, diabetic microvascular and macrovascular complications, and the magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography findings, the type of therapy provided, the time to recovery of initial muscle infarction, recurrences, and deaths. RESULTS: A total of 36 references meeting our inclusion criteria were retrieved, describing 49 patients. Thirty-four patients received conservative therapy (bedrest and analgesics), 8 received medical therapy (antiplatelet agents and/or steroids), and 7 had surgical excision of the infarcted muscle. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The time to recovery from treatment onset was 8.1 weeks, 5.5 weeks, and 13 weeks in the conservative, medical, and surgical treatment groups, respectively. This was statistically significant only when comparing medical and surgical treatment. The respective recurrence rates were 35%, 29%, and 71%. The respective mortality rates within 2 years were 4%, 14%, and 29%. CONCLUSION: This study supports the use of nonsurgical treatment in patients with DMI. It also demonstrates that DMI can be temporally associated with death.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.354 · 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