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 OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cintia González Blanco, Ana Chico Ballesteros, Ignasi Gich, Rosa Corcoy

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.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.038
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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

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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations33
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes Technology & TherapeuticsSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207