Combined Effects of Routine Blood Pressure Lowering and Intensive Glucose Control on Macrovascular and Microvascular Outcomes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the magnitude and independence of the effects of routine blood pressure lowering and intensive glucose control on clinical outcomes in patients with long-standing type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, factorial randomized trial of perindopril-indapamide versus placebo (double-blind comparison) and intensive glucose control with a gliclazide MR-based regimen (target A1C <or=6.5%) versus standard glucose control (open comparison) in 11,140 participants with type 2 diabetes who participated in the Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) trial. Annual event rates and risks of major macrovascular and microvascular events considered jointly and separately, renal events, and death during an average 4.3 years of follow-up were assessed, using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: There was no interaction between the effects of routine blood pressure lowering and intensive glucose control for any of the prespecified clinical outcomes (all P > 0.1): the separate effects of the two interventions for the renal outcomes and death appeared to be additive on the log scale. Compared with neither intervention, combination treatment reduced the risk of new or worsening nephropathy by 33% (95% CI 12-50%, P = 0.005), new onset of macroalbuminuria by 54% (35-68%, P < 0.0001), and new onset of microalbuminuria by 26% (17-34%). Combination treatment was associated with an 18% reduction in the risk of all-cause death (1-32%, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of routine blood pressure lowering and intensive glucose control were independent of one another. When combined, they produced additional reductions in clinically relevant outcomes.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it