MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142961456 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.092144

Newly diagnosed diabetes mellitus as a risk factor for serious liver disease

2010· article· en· W2142961456 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Liane Porepa, J. G. Ray, Paula Sanchez-Romeu, Gillian L. Booth

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersUniversity of TorontoOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareBanting and Best Diabetes Centre, University of TorontoInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusHazard ratioLiver diseaseInternal medicineNonalcoholic fatty liver diseaseFatty liverDyslipidemiaPopulationCirrhosisRisk factorDiseaseConfidence intervalEndocrinologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The negative impact of diabetes mellitus is well recognized, yet little is known about the effect of this disease on the liver, an organ susceptible to nonalcoholic fatty liver disease related to insulin resistance. We evaluated whether adults with newly diagnosed diabetes were at increased risk of serious liver disease. METHODS: We used administrative health databases for the province of Ontario (1994-2006) to perform a population-based matched retrospective cohort study. The exposed group comprised 438 069 adults with newly diagnosed diabetes. The unexposed comparison group--those without known diabetes--consisted of 2 059 708 individuals, matched 5:1 to exposed persons, by birth year, sex and local health region. We excluded individuals with pre-existing liver or alcohol-related disease. The primary study outcome was the subsequent development of serious liver disease, namely, liver cirrhosis, liver failure and its sequelae, or receipt of a liver transplant. RESULTS: The incidence rate of serious liver disease was 8.19 per 10 000 person-years among those with newly diagnosed diabetes and 4.17 per 10 000 person-years among those without diabetes. The unadjusted hazard ratio was 1.92 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.83-2.01). After adjustment for age, income, urban residence, health care utilization and pre-existing hypertension, dyslipidemia, obesity and cardiovascular disease, the hazard ratio was 1.77 (95% CI 1.68-1.86). INTERPRETATION: Adults with newly diagnosed diabetes appeared to be at higher risk of advanced liver disease, also known as diabetic hepatopathy. Whether this reflects nonalcoholic fatty liver disease or direct glycemic injury of the liver remains to be determined.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0080.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations139
Published2010
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207