MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108018037 · doi:10.1586/erc.10.186

Wrongfully accused: metformin use in heart failure

2011· letter· en· W2108018037 on OpenAlexaff
Dean T. Eurich, Finlay A. McAlister

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy · 2011
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsCanadian VIGOUR CentreAlliance for Canadian Health Outcomes Research in DiabetesUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetforminHeart failureType 2 diabetesTolerabilityDiabetes mellitusGlycemicInternal medicineObservational studyIntensive care medicineCardiologyEndocrinologyAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaluation of: Aguilar D, Chan W, Bozkurt B, Ramasubbu K, Deswal A. Metformin use and mortality in ambulatory patients with diabetes and heart failure. Circ. Heart Fail. 4(1), 53-58 (2010). Metformin has long been the cornerstone of therapy for glycemic control in patients with Type 2 diabetes worldwide. It is recommended as first-line therapy by all major diabetes clinical practice guidelines owing to its efficacy, favorable tolerability profile and beneficial effects in limiting weight gain. Moreover, metformin is the only oral anthyperglycemic agent shown in randomized controlled trials to reduce mortality in newly diagnosed patients with Type 2 diabetes. However, the use of metformin has not been without controversy, in particular in patients with heart failure. This article will review a recent observational study by Aguilar et al. published in Circulation - Heart Failure that reported improved outcomes associated with metformin therapy in patients with diabetes and heart failure.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Cardiovascular TherapySame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207