Evaluation of proposed oral disposition index measures in relation to the actual disposition index
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
Aims While the disposition index provides a useful measure of B-cell function, its calculation requires the performance of a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIVGTT). Recently, the demonstration of a hyperbolic relationship between indices of insulin secretion and insulin sensitivity derived from the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) has led to the introduction of two novel OGTT-based measures of B-cell function analogous to the disposition index: (i) the insulin secretion-sensitivity index-2 (ISSI-2) (defined as the ratio of the area-under-the-insulin-curve to the area-under-the-glucose curve, multiplied by the Matsuda index) and (ii) insulinogenic index (IGI)/fasting insulin. However, neither of these two measures has been directly compared with the disposition index. Methods Two hundred and thirteen non-diabetic children (122 boys, 91 girls) underwent both OGTT and FSIVGTT, allowing for the calculation of ISSI-2, IGI/fasting insulin and the disposition index. Results ISS1-2 and IGI/fasting insulin were strongly correlated with each other (r = 0.82, P < 0.0001). Both measures correlated with the disposition index, with ISSI-2 showing a modestly stronger association (ISSI-2: r = 0.24, P = 0.0003; IGI/fasting insulin: r = 0.21, P = 0.0022). Standardized linear regression analyses confirmed that the relationship between log ISSI-2 and the disposition index (standardized regression coefficient = 0.224, P = 0.001) was stronger than that between log IGI/fasting insulin and the disposition index (standardized regression coefficient = 0.166, P = 0.015). Conclusions The OGTT-derived measures ISSI-2 and IGI/fasting insulin exhibit modest correlations with the disposition index. These relationships require further assessment in other patient populations.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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