MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091691935 · doi:10.1089/dia.2011.0032

Glycemic Control and Pregnancy Outcomes in Women with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Using Lispro Versus Regular Insulin: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2011· review· en· W2091691935 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Technology & Therapeutics · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineGlycemicPregnancyObstetricsMeta-analysisGestational diabetesType 1 diabetesCochrane LibraryInsulin lisproGestational agePediatricsDiabetes mellitusGestationInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: This study performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on glycemic control and pregnancy outcomes in women with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) treated with lispro (LP) versus regular insulin (RI) since before pregnancy. METHODS: We performed a MEDLINE and EMBASE search. Abstracts (and full articles when appropriate) were reviewed by two independent researchers. Inclusion criteria were patients with T1DM, data on women treated with RI and LP since before pregnancy until delivery in the same article, at least five pregnancies in each group, and information on at least one pregnancy outcome. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for cohort studies. RESULTS: Outcome data were summarized with Revman version 5.0 (ims.cochrane.org/revman/download [The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark]), applying a random effects model. Two hundred sixty-seven abstracts were identified, and four full articles fulfilled inclusion criteria, all of them corresponding to observational studies. Baseline characteristics were similar in women treated with LP or RI. Regarding outcome data, no differences between LP and RI groups were observed in hemoglobin A1c, gestational age at birth, birth weight, and rate of diabetic ketoacidosis, pregnancy-induced hypertension, pre-eclampsia, spontaneous miscarriages, interruptions, total abortions, cesarean section, preterm birth, macrosomia, small-for gestational-age newborns, stillbirth, neonatal and perinatal mortality, neonatal hypoglycemia, and major malformations. The rate of large-for-gestational age newborns was higher in the LP group (relative risk 1.38; 95% confidence interval 1.14-1.68). CONCLUSIONS: In relation to women with T1DM treated with RI, those treated with LP display similar baseline characteristics and no differences in metabolic control or perinatal outcome with the exception of a higher rate of large-for-gestational-age newborns.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.264 · 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