Within-Individual Hematocrit Variations and Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) systems have generated artefactually increased glucose results in low-hematocrit patients (e.g., intensive care unit and renal failure patients); conversely, these devices could produce artefactually decreased glucose results in high-hematocrit patients (e.g., neonates). The introduction of hematocrit-independent SMBG systems permits more accurate testing in anemic or polycythemic individuals. In this issue of Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, Ramljak and coauthors have created glucose bias graphs for 19 common SMBG devices and declared certain systems to be optimally accurate because of insensitivity to hematocrit variation over a broad hematocrit range. Luckily, the average within-individual variation of hematocrit is low (between 2.9 and 3.3%). As such, a larger spectrum of SMBG devices can be regarded as optimally hematocrit independent.
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 | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| 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".