A Risk Score for Type 1 Diabetes Derived From Autoantibody-Positive Participants in the Diabetes Prevention Trial–Type 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The accurate prediction of type 1 diabetes is essential for appropriately identifying prevention trial participants. Thus, we have developed a risk score for the prediction of type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Diabetes Prevention Trial-Type 1 (DPT-1) participants, islet cell autoantibody (ICA)-positive relatives of type 1 diabetic patients (n = 670), were randomly divided into development and validation samples. Risk score values were calculated for the validation sample from development sample model coefficients obtained through forward stepwise proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: A risk score based on a model including log-BMI, age, log-fasting C-peptide, and postchallenge glucose and C-peptide sums from 2-h oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) was derived from the development sample. The baseline risk score strongly predicted type 1 diabetes in the validation sample (chi(2) = 82.3, P < 0.001). Its strength of prediction was almost the same (chi(2) = 83.3) as a risk score additionally dependent on a decreased first-phase insulin response variable from intravenous glucose tolerance tests (IVGTTs). Biochemical autoantibodies did not contribute significantly to the risk score model. A final type 1 diabetes risk score was then derived from all participants with the same variables as those in the development sample model. The change in the type 1 diabetes risk score from baseline to 1 year was in itself also highly predictive of type 1 diabetes (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A risk score based on age, BMI, and OGTT indexes, without dependence on IVGTTs or additional autoantibodies, appears to accurately predict type 1 diabetes in ICA-positive relatives.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".