MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139015283 · doi:10.1177/1479164111428628

The effects of rosiglitazone on myocardial triglyceride content in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomised, placebo-controlled trial

2011· article· en· W2139015283 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan McGavock, Lidia S. Szczepaniak, Colby Ayers, Shuaib Abdullah, Raphael See, M. Odette Gore, Mark H. Drazner, James A. de Lemos, Darren K. McGuire

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes and Vascular Disease Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGlaxoSmithKlinePfizerNational Center for Research ResourcesNovo NordiskDonald W. Reynolds Foundation
KeywordsMedicineRosiglitazonePlaceboInternal medicineType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusClinical endpointPopulationTriglycerideCardiologyRandomized controlled trialEndocrinologyCholesterolPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This was a nested sub-study of a randomised placebo-controlled trial of the effect of 6 months of treatment with rosiglitazone added to existing therapy on myocardial triglyceride (mTG) content in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and prevalent cardiovascular disease (CVD) or at least one additional risk factor. The primary endpoint, mTG content, was measured with cardiac (1)H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Of the 99 randomised participants selected for the imaging sub-study, 49 (48%) had complete and interpretable spectroscopy data (age = 58 years, duration of T2D = 9.5 years; 57% women and 69% non-white). There was no significant change in mTG in either group (-0.1 ± 0.6% and -0.05 ± 0.8% respectively) and the changes in mTG were not associated with changes in left ventricular structure or function. Compared with placebo, treatment with rosiglitazone for 6 months had no discernible effect on mTG or left ventricular function in this population with long-standing diabetes and CVD.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations19
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes and Vascular Disease ResearchSame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207