Pulsatile Insulin Secretion: Detection, Regulation, and Role in Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insulin concentrations oscillate at a periodicity of 5-15 min per oscillation. These oscillations are due to coordinate insulin secretory bursts, from millions of islets. The generation of common secretory bursts requires strong within-islet and within-pancreas coordination to synchronize the secretory activity from the beta-cell population. The overall contribution of this pulsatile mechanism dominates and accounts for the majority of insulin release. This review discusses the methods involved in the detection and quantification of periodicities and individual secretory bursts. The mechanism by which overall insulin secretion is regulated through changes in the pulsatile component is discussed for nerves, metabolites, hormones, and drugs. The impaired pulsatile secretion of insulin in type 2 diabetes has resulted in much focus on the impact of the insulin delivery pattern on insulin action, and improved action from oscillatory insulin exposure is demonstrated on liver, muscle, and adipose tissues. Therefore, not only is the dominant regulation of insulin through changes in secretory burst mass and amplitude, but the changes may affect insulin action. Finally, the role of impaired pulsatile release in early type 2 diabetes suggests a predictive value of studies on insulin pulsatility in the development of this disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".