Glargine dose titration by patients and physicians was equally effective for preventing severe hypoglycaemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Davies M, Storms F, Shutler S, et al . Improvement of glycemic control in subjects with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes: comparison of two treatment algorithms using insulin glargine. Diabetes Care 2005;28:1282–8. [OpenUrl][1][Abstract/FREE Full Text][2] Q In patients with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus, is insulin glargine dose titration by a physician equivalent to titration by the patient for preventing severe hypoglycaemia and improving glycaemic control? Clinical impact ratings GP/FP/Primary care ★★★★★★☆ Internal medicine ★★★★★☆☆ Endocrine ★★★★★★☆ ### ![Graphic][3]</img>Design: randomised controlled trial.* ### ![Graphic][4]</img>Allocation: unclear concealment.* ### ![Graphic][5]</img>Blinding: unblinded.* ### ![Graphic][6]</img>Follow up period: 24 weeks. ### ![Graphic][7]</img>Setting: 611 centres in 59 countries in Western and Eastern Europe, South America, Asia, and Africa/Middle East. ### ![Graphic][8]</img>Patients: 5033 patients ⩾18 years of age (mean age 58 y, 58% women) with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (required basal long acting insulin for the control of hyperglycaemia) and glycated haemoglobin [HbA1C] concentrations >7.0% and <12.0% and BMI <40 kg/m2. Exclusion criteria included impaired renal function and … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DDiabetes%2BCare%26rft.stitle%253DDiabetes%2BCare%26rft.issn%253D0149-5992%26rft.aulast%253DDavies%26rft.auinit1%253DM.%26rft.volume%253D28%26rft.issue%253D6%26rft.spage%253D1282%26rft.epage%253D1288%26rft.atitle%253DImprovement%2Bof%2BGlycemic%2BControl%2Bin%2BSubjects%2BWith%2BPoorly%2BControlled%2BType%2B2%2BDiabetes%253A%2BComparison%2Bof%2Btwo%2Btreatment%2Balgorithms%2Busing%2Binsulin%2Bglargine%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.2337%252Fdiacare.28.6.1282%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F15920040%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/ijlink?linkType=ABST&journalCode=diacare&resid=28/6/1282&atom=%2Febmed%2F11%2F2%2F46.atom [3]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [4]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-4.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-5.gif [8]: /embed/inline-graphic-6.gif
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".